Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

Full text of "Proceedings"

See other formats


PROCEEDINGS (2) 

OF THE 

ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 

IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK 



Volume III] OCTOBER, 1912 '3 [Number 1 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 

CONSTITUTION, BY-LAWS AND LIST OF 
OFFICERS AND MEMBERS 



The Academv of Political Science 

Columbia University, New York 

1912 




THE ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 



IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK 



EXECUTIVE OFFICES 

KENT HALL, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, NEW YORK 

Telephone Morningside 1400 



(2^ 



CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS 



CONSTITUTION 

Article I — Name 

The name of this association shall be " The Academy of Polit- 
ical Science in the City of New York." 

Article II — Objects 

The objects of the Academy are the cultivation of the political 
sciences and their application to the solution of social and polit- 
ical problems. These objects shall be prosecuted in such manner 
as the Board of Trustees shall from time to time direct, either 
by the encouragement of research, the holding of public meet- 
ings or lecture courses, the establishment of a library, or in any 
other way the Board may approve. 

Article III — Headquarters 

The headquarters of the Academy shall be in the City of New 
York, and the Academy shall be affiliated with Columbia Uni- 
versity in such manner as the Board of Trustees may be able to 
arrange with the Trustees of Columbia University. 

Article IV — Membership and Dues 

The Board of Trustees shall prescribe the qualifications of 
members, and establish such classes of membership, whether life, 
active, associate or otherwise, as it may deem wise, define the 
privileges of members and fix the amount of the annual dues or 
life-membership fees to be paid by the members. 

Article V — Government 

The management of all the affairs of the Academy and the 
trusteeship of all its property are vested in a Board of Trustees 
composed of nine directors elected by the members of the Acad- 
emy, and the officers elected by the Board of Directors. Three 
directors shall be chosen at the annual meeting each year for a 
term of three years each. 

(3) 

pp. 1-48 reprinted by Kraus Reprint Corporation. 



4 YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY [Vol. Ill 

At the annual meeting at which this constitution is adopted 
nine directors shall be elected, and those persons so chosen shall 
at their first meeting, to be called within one week from the date 
of the annual meeting by the secretary of that meeting, cast 
lots so that the terms of service of three directors shall expire 
at the next annual meeting, three at the second, and three at 
the third annual meeting from the one at which the nine direc- 
tors were chosen. 

The directors and the officers together constitute the Board 
of Trustees and any five of them shall constitute a quorum. 
The Board shall meet at the call of the President of the Acad- 
emy, who shall be ex officio the Chairman of the Board. At any 
time at the written request of three members of the Board the 
President shall call a meeting. 

In the event of the death or resignation of a director, the 
Board shall fill the vacancy until the next annual business meet- 
ing of the members when the members shall elect a person to 
fill the unexpired term. 

Article VI — Officers 

The officers of the Academy shall be a President, two Vice- 
Presidents, a Secretary and a Treasurer, who shall be elected 
annually by the directors at the first meeting of the Board sub- 
sequent to the annual business meeting of the Academy. They 
shall be elected for a term of one year and shall serve until 
their successors are chosen and shall perform the duties usually 
pertaining to their respective offices and such as may be pre- 
scribed by the Board of Trustees. 

Article VII — Meetings 

The meetings of the Academy shall be held at such times 
and places and for such purposes as the Board of Trustees may 
direct, except that at least once a year in the month of December 
or January the Board shall fix a date for the annual business 
meeting for the election of directors and the presentation of 
reports on the work of the Academy from its officers or from 
the Board of Trustees, or both, and notice of such meeting 
shall be mailed to all members at least ten days prior to the 
date so fixed. Such members as are present shall constitute a 
quorum. 

(4) 



No. I] CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS 5 

Article VIII — Advisory Council 

The Board of Trustees may elect an Advisory Council to be 
composed of men distinguished for public service, whether 
members of the Academy or not, provided they are interested 
in its work and willing to give counsel in the formulation and 
execution of its policies. 

Article IX — By-Laivs and Amendments 

The Board of Trustees shall have power to adopt by-laws not 
inconsistent with this constitution for the better transaction of 
its business, and amend the same at pleasure and this constitu- 
tion may be amended by a majority vote at any annual business 
meeting or at any regularly called special business meeting of 
the members of the Academy provided notice of such meeting 
has been mailed to all members at least ten days prior to the 
date of meeting, and provided further, that all amendments 
shall have the approval of a majority of the Board of Trustees, 
or otherwise must be considered at two consecutive business 
meetings of the members of the Academy before they can be 
put to vote. 

BY-LAWS 

1. The Board of Trustees shall meet at the call of the Presi- 
dent, and five members shall constitute a quorum. On written 
request of three members of the Board the President shall call 
a meeting of the Board. 

2. Any person interested in the work of the Academy and 
signifying a desire to promote its objects shall, upon application 
to the Secretary and upon payment of dues for the ensuing year, 
be enrolled as a member. 

3. Members of the Academy shall pay annual dues in the 
amount of five dollars, payable in advance. Said payment 
shall date from the first day of the quarter (January — March, 
April — June, July — September, October — December) in which 
such members were enrolled, except that the membership of 
persons enrolled in March, June, September and December shall 
date for the payment of dues from the first day of the follow- 
ing month. 

(5) 



6 YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 

4. Any member may compound his annual dues by the single 
payment of one hundred dollars and thereby be enrolled as a 
Life Member and be exempt from further payment of annual 
dues. 

5. The President shall have executive control of the business 
oflfices of the Academy. He shall appoint an "Assistant to the 
President " subject to the approval of the Board and at a salary 
to be fixed by the Board, and shall prescribe the duties of that 
officer. 

6. The President shall approve all bills incurred for the Acad- 
emy and transmit them for payment to the office of the Treas- 
urer, together with a copy of, or reference to, the resolution of 
the Board under which the expense was incurred, except that 
incidental office expenses in an amount not to exceed one hun- 
dred dollars ($100) a month, and bills for temporary service in 
the offices of the Academy, or for purposes (services, material, 
traveling expenses, etc.) connected with the regular routine 
business of the Academy, or the work of any of its committees, 
in amounts not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100) may be 
paid by the Treasurer upon the approval of the President with- 
out special resolution of the Board, provided, however, all such 
payments be reported to and approved by the Board at its next 
meeting. 

7. These by-laws may be amended at any meeting of the Board 
of Trustees by a majority vote, provided at least eight members 
of the Board vote in favor of such amendment or subsequently 
record in writing their consent thereto. 

(6) 



OFFICERS OF THE ACADEMY 



president 
Samuel McCune Lindsay 

Professor of Social Legislation, Columbia University 

VICE-PRESIDENTS 

Albert Shaw 

Editor of "The Review of Reviews" 

Paul M. Warburg 

Kuhn, Loeb & Company 

SECRETARY 

Henry Raymond Mussey 

Associate Professor of Economics, Columbia University 

TREASURER 

George A. Plimpton 

Ginn & Company, New York 



ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT 

Emma S. Lake 



Robert Erskine Ely 

League for Political Education 

Frank J. Goodnow 

Professor of Administrative Law, 
Columbia University 

A. Barton Hepburn 

President Chase National Bank, 
New York 

Thomas W. Lamont 

J. P. Morgan & Company, New York 

William R. Shepherd 
Professor of History, Columbia University 



Henry R. Seager 

Professor of Political Economy, 
Columbia University 

Edwin R. A. Seligman 

Professor of Political Economy, 
Columbia University 

MuNROE Smith 

Professor of Comparative Jurisprudence 
Columbia University 

Frank A. Vanderlip 

President National City Bank, New York 



ADVISORY COUNCIL 



Nicholas Murray Butler 

President of Columbia University 

J. PiERpoNT Morgan 

J. P. Morgan & Company 



EDITOR POLITICAL SCIENCE QUARTERLY 

Munroe Smith 



Elihu Root 

United States Senator from New York 

Francis Lynde Stetson 

New York Bar 



EDITOR PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY 

Henry Raymond Mussey 



(7) 



LIFE MEMBERS OF THE ACADEMY 



Brackenridge, George W. San Antonio Natl. Bank, San Antonio, Texas 

Dunham, Edward K. 35 East 68th Street 

Frankland, Frederick Wm. " Okataina," Foxton, Manawatu, New Zealand 
Griffin, Frederick R. Sherbrooke and Simpson Sts., Montreal, Canada 

Hyams, Godfrey M. P. O. Box 5104, Boston, Mass. 

lies, George Park Avenue Hotel 

Quesada, Ernesto Libertad 946, Buenos Aires, R. A. 

Riker, John J. 46 Cedar Street 

Smith, S. L. 1013 Woodland Ave., Detroit, Mich. 

Williams, John Skelton 801 E. Main St., Richmond, Va. 



MEMBERS OF THE ACADEMY* 



Aaron, Charles E. 
Abbott, Edwin M. 
Abbott, E. G. 
Abbott, Lyman 
Acheson, Edward G. 
Ackerman, William 
Adams, A. E. 
Adams, Miss Charlotte H. 
Adams, Edward D. 
Adams, Henry Sherman 
Adams, Samuel B. 
Adriance, Benjamin 
Adsit, Charles 
Agar, John G. 
Albert, S. 
Alberti, Paul E. 
Albertson, Thomas W. 
Alexander, Mrs. A. 
Alexander, George 
Alexander, J. S. 
Alexander, William H. 
Allen, D. B. 
Allen, Ethan 
Allen, Frank D. 
Allen, Frederick H. 



830 Central Avenue, Plainfield, N. J. 

818 Land Title Building, Philadelphia, Pa. 

14 Deering Street, Portland, Me. 

287 Fourth Avenue 

Niagara Falls, N. Y. 

300 West 12 1st Street 

5th Avenue & Broadway, Youngstown, 0. 

3 Gramercy Park 

71 Broadway 

152 Montague Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Savannah, Ga. 

254 Van Brunt Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Hornell, N. Y. 

31 Nassau Street 

112 Lenox Avenue 

50 Pine Street 

Mineola, N. Y. 

Castle Point, Hoboken, N. J. 

90 West Broadway 

31 Nassau Street 

80 Maiden Lane 

Arlington, la. 

126 Fifth Avenue 

39 Claremont Avenue 

63 Wall Street 



* In addresses giving street and number only, the city is New York. 

(8) 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



Allen, Frederick L. 
Allen, Frederick W. 
Allen, George W. H. 
Allen, Mrs. George W. 
Allen, William H. 
Altschul, C. 



55 Cedar Street 

2,Z Wall Street 

Box 538, Cazenovia-on-Lake Owahgena, N. Y. 

Box i88, Bayden, Cazenovia, N. Y. 

385 Central Park West 

10 Wall Street 



Altschul, Richard Anglo London & Paris Natl. Bank, San Francisco, Calif. 



Alvord. Andrew P. 
Alvord, Dean 
Amerman, W. H. 
Ames, Frank D. 
Amory, Copley 
Anderson, A. A. 
Anderson, Frank B 
Anderson, John 
Anderson, Mrs. J. Scott 
Anderson, Thomas T. 
Andrews, A. C. 
Andrews, Arthur Irving 
Andrews, Constant A. 
Andrews, George Frederick 
Andrews, W. H. 
Andriano, Albert Koch 
Apple, Harry E. 
Archbold, John D. 
Archer, Mrs. G. C. 
Arend, Francis J. 
Arents, George, jr. 
Armstrong, Dwight M. 
Armstrong, James 
Armstrong, Russell 
Armstrong, S. T. 
Arnheim, Albert A. 
Arnold, Carrington G. 
Arnstein, Leo 
Arvine, E. P. 
Ashley, R. L. 
Aspegren, John 
Astruck, J. Harry 
Atkins, George W. E. 
Atkinson, Franklin Pierce 
Atterbury, Charles L. 
Atterbury, John T. 
Atwater, Richard M., jr. 
Atwood, Kimball C. 
Atwood, Kimball C, jr. 
Auchincloss, Gordon 
Auerbach, Joseph S. 
Auerbach, Louis 



12 West 44th Street 

III Broadway 

21 State Street 

26 West 31st Street 

Walpole, N. H. 

80 West 40th Street 

are of the Bank of California, San Francisco, Calif. 

81 Maiden Lane 

Swarthmore, Pa. 

4241 Folsom Avenue, St. Louis, Mo. 

83 Cedar Street 

Tufts College, Mass. 

Park Avenue, White Plains, N. Y. 

P. O. Box 2305, Boston, Mass. 

130 East 67th Street 

810 Broadway 

3100 Broadway 

26 Broadway 

II West 91st Street 

165 Broadway 

III Fifth Avenue 

1 150 Eastmoreland Ave., Memphis, Tenn. 

71 Nassau Street 

60 Broadway 

Katonah, N. Y. 

119 Cottage Avenue, Mount Vernon, N. Y. 

30 Broad Street 

City Hall 

42 Church Street, New Haven, Conn. 

537 West I2ist Street 

New York Produce Exchange 

7-9 West i8th Street 

195 Broadway 

Great Falls, Mont. 

30 Broad Street 

5 Nassau Street 

25 Broad Street 

290 Broadway 

290 Broadway 

120 East 70th Street 

34 Nassau Street 

842 Broadway 

(9) 



lO 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Austin, Charles 

Avery, Samuel P. 

Babbott, Frank L. 

Babcock. H. D. 

Bache, Jules S. 

Bache, Leopold S. 

Bachia, Richard A. 

Bacon, Edward R. 

Bacon, Mrs. Francis McN., jr. 

Bacon, George Wood 

Bacon, Robert L. 

Baer, George F. 

Baer, Louis D. 

Baettenhaussen, Theodore 

Bailey, Frank 

Baird, F. C. 

Baker, Alfred L. 

Baker, Charles Adkins, 

Baker, George F., jr. 

Baker, O. M. 

Baker, Orin C. 

Baketel, H. Sheridan 

Baldwin, Frank V. 

Baldwin, Mrs. Martin T. 

Baldwin, William D. 

Baldwin, William H. 

Ballin, William 

Barber, James T. 

Barber, Major William 

Barbour, Edmund D. 

Barclay, R. G. 

Bard, Albert S. 

Baring, Charles 

Barkley, Charles B. 

Barlow, Peter T. 

Barnes, Edward W. 

Barnum, William M. 

Barry, Charles D. 

Barstow, George Fames 

Barth, Alfred 

Barthelemy, Louis C. 

Bartlett, J. Kemp 

Bartlett, Philip G. 

Baruch, Bernard M. 

Baruch, Emanuel de M. 

Bassett, Acton Civil! 

Bassett, Sheldon H. 

Batchelder. Wallace 

Bates, George H. 



23 West Street, Battle Creek, Mich. 

61 Woodland Street, Hartford, Conn. 

346 Broadway 

20 East 52d Street 

42 Broadway 

42 Broadway 

47 West i6th Street 

2 Wall Street 

135 East 39th Street 

115 Broadway 

14 Wall Street 

Reading Terminal, Philadelphia, Pa. 

21 Claremont Avenue 

542 Fifth Avenue 

175 Remsen Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

224 Frick Building, Pittsburgh, Pa. 

141 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, 111. 

52 Broadway 

2 Wall Street 

Myrick Building, Springfield, Mass. 

238 East 48th Street 

34 Beach Street 

170 Prospect Place, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Glen Ridge, N. J. 

175 West sSth Street 

1415 21 St Street, Washington, D. C. 

601 West 113th Street 

Eau Claire, Wis. 

52 Beaver Street 

610 Sears Building, Boston, Mass. 

5 East 78th Street 

25 Broad Street 

42 New Street 

22 East 47th Street 

10 Lexington Avenue 

70 Worth Street 

62 Cedar Street 

17 State Street 

Barstow, Tex. 

411 West 114th Street 

10 Wall Street 

2100 Mt. Royal Terrace, Baltimore, Md. 

62 Cedar Street 

III Broadway 

57 East 77th Street 

165 Broadway 

I Madison Avenue 

Bethel, Vt. 

23 Holly Street, Cranford, N. J. 

(10) 



No. i] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



II 



Bates, Mrs. Lindon W. 
Battelle, John Gordon 
Batten, George 
Battle, George Gordon 
Baumann, F. W. 
Bayley, George W. 
Bayne, Howard 
Beaman, George Herbert 
Beard, Curtis J. 
Beardsley, Samuel A. 
Beckwith, Holmes 
Bedell, Louis 
Beeber, Mrs. J. D. 
Beekman, Charles K. 
Beekman, Gerard 
Beer, G. L. 
Bell, Frederick D. 
Bell, Mrs. Gordon K. 
Bell, James J. 
Beller, William F. 
Bellevue, Fernand S. 
Belmont, August 
Belmont, Mrs. O. H. P. 
Beman, Lamar T. 
Bemis, E. W. 
Bend, Miss Beatrice 
Benedict, L. C. 
Benjamin, Eugene S. 
Benjamin, G. G. 
Benjamin, M. W. 
Bensel, J. A. 
Benton, A. 
Beran, Theodore 
Berglund, Abraham 
Bernard, G. H. 
Bernheim, Isaac W. 
Bernheimer, Charles S. 
Bernheimer, Max E. 
Bertram, H. Henry 
Bertschmann, J. 
Berwind, Edward J. 
Best, Harry 
Bettman, Alfred 
Betts, Charles H. 
Betts, Robert M. 
Bevin, W. D. 
Bickford, Herbert J. 
Bidstrup, J. F. 
Bigelow, Charles C. 



784 Fifth Avenue 

Columbus, O. 

93 Union Street, Montclair. N. J. 

37 Wall Street 

6-9 Hanover Street 

442 Jamaica Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

135 Broadway 

2232 Massachusetts Avenue, Washington, D. C. 

41 West 34th Street 

54 Wall Street 

331 E^st 31st Street 

III Broadway 

600 West 4th Street, Williamsport, Pa. 

52 William Street 

35 East 38th Street 

329 West 71st Street 

39 West 38th Street 

58 East 72d Street 

Shenandoah, Pa. 

51 East 123d Street 

Whitestone, L. L 

23 Nassau Street 

477 Madison Avenue 

East High School, Cleveland, O. 

852 Montrose Boulevard, Chicago, 111. 

563 Park Avenue 

7 Wall Street 

440 Lafayette Street 

467 North Park Avenue, Meadville, Pa. 

43 West 88th Street 

Albany, N. Y. 

79 Wall Street 

I West 64th Street 

Pullman, Wash. 

Glasco, Kan. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Pitkin Avenue & Watkins Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

128th Street & Amsterdam Avenue 

116 West 14th Street 

P. O. Box 418 

I Broadway 

14 Livingstone Place 

1514 First National Bank Building, Cincinnati, O. 

29 Holly Street, Lyons, N. Y. 

Cornucopia, Ore. 

109 Leonard Street 

100 St. Marks Place, New Brighton, S. I. 

42 Jerome Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

1926 Broadway 

Cii) 



12 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Biggs, Albert W. 
Biggs, Charles 
Bijur, Nathan 
Bilgram, Hugo 
Billquist, C. Edward 
Bing, Alexander M. 
Bishop, James C. 
Bishop, Samuel H. 
Bixby, W. H. 
Black, Mrs. Elmer E. 
Black, Hugh 
Black, William H. 
Blades, J. B. 
Blagden, Arthur C, 
Blair, Mrs. C. Ledyard 
Blake, Edwin M. 
Blake, Joseph A. 
Blakeley, William A. 
Blanchard. Irvin T. 
Blashfield, Edwin H. 
Bliss, C. N., jr. 
Bliss, William H. 
Blount, Henry F. 
Blount, Walter E. 
Blum, Charles 
Blum, Edward C. 
Blumenthal, Mrs. George 
Blumenthal, Hugo 
Blumenthal, Sidney 
Bodine, Samuel T. 
Body, Joseph F. 
Bogne, Virgil G. 
Bollinger, James Wills 
Bolster, Wilfred 
Bond, James A. C. 
Bondy, Joseph 
Bonn, Dr. M. J. 
Bontecou, Frederic T . 
Booraem, Alfred W. 
Borchard, Edwin M. 
Borg, Sidney C. 
Borges, Esteban Gil 
Bostwick, Charles F. 
Boudin, L. B. 
Boudinot, George S. 
Bourne, Frederick G. 
Bouvier, John Vernon, jr. 
Bowman, D. Arthur 
Bowman, Harold M. 



Tennessee Trust Building, Memphis, Tenn. 

13 Astor Place 

160 West 75th Street 

1235 Spring Garden Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

ir Broadway 

505 Fifth Avenue 

iz Pine Street 

500 West i22d Street 

735 Southern Bldg., Washington, D. C. 

512 Fifth Avenue 

109 Lorraine Avenue, Upper Montclair, N. J. 

18 East 28th Street 

New Bern, N. C. 

176 East 70th Street 

Peapack, N. J. 

Room 1406, I Liberty Street 

601 Madison Avenue 

1237 Oliver Building, Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Woodland, N. C. 

48 West 59th Street 

117 Duane Street 

6 East 65th Street 

" The Oaks," Washington, D. C. 

Bluemont, Va. 

Jacksonville, Fla. 

424 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

23 West 53d Street 

5 Nassau Street 

305 West 90th Street 

Broad & Arch Streets, Philadelphia, Pa. 

P. O. Box 842, Baltimore, Md. 

Mills Building, San Francisco, Calif. 

425 Locust Street, Davenport, la. 

Court House. Boston, Mass. 

Westminster, Md. 

910 Irving Avenue, Syracuse, N. Y. 

Gaussstrasse, Munich, Germany 

150 Highland Avenue, Orange, N. J. 

204 Lincoln Place, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. 

20 Nassau Street 

1343 Monroe Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 

Criminal Courts Building 

302 Broadway 

30 Church Street 

149 Broadway 

141 Broadway 

Third National Bank Building, St. Louis, Mo. 

19 Edgemont Road, Upper Montclair, N. J. 

(12) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



13 



Boyd, R. E. 

Brackenridge, George W* 
Bradley, Robert S. 
Brady, Anthony N. 
Brainerd, Ira H. 
Braley, Henry K. 
Braman, Chester A. 
Brandner, Benjamin L. 
Brandow, Morris 
Braswell, James C. 
Breed, R. E. 
Bremer, Paul G. 
Brennan, John F. 
Brewer, Mrs. M. D. 
Brewster, William T. 
Brice, W. Kirkpatrick 
Briesen, Arthur von 
Briggs, Frank O. 
Bright, Edgar H. 
Brinsmade, John C. 
Bristol, George W. 
Bristol, John I. D. 
Britton, Alexander 
Brock, Alfred T. 
Brockett, Orlando Mitchell 
Brody, Joseph M. 
Brokaw, George T. 
Bronner, Harry 
Brookings, Robert S. 
Brown, Charles C. 
Brown, Charles Paul 
Brown, Charles S. 
Brown, Dickson Q, 
Brown, Edward W. 
Brown, Frank L. 
Brown, Franklin Q. 
Brown, Francis Shunk 
Brown, Hugh Henry 
Brown, H. J. 
Brown, James 
Brown, Lowell H. 
Brown, Paul 
Brown, Philip King 
Brown, Selden S. 
Brown, Walston H. 
Browning, J. A. 
Bruere, Miss Mina W. 



409 West 2ist Street 

San Antonio Natl. Bank, San Antonio, Tex. 

92 State Street, Boston, Mass. 

54 Wall Street 

39 Claremont Avenue 

151 Kilsyth Road, Brighton, Mass. 

70 Worth Street 

15 William Street 

488 Peachtree Street, Atlanta, Ga. 

Rocky Mount, N. C. 

30 Church Street 

738 East 4th Street, St. Paul, Minn. 

16 South Broadway, Yonkers, N. Y. 

400 Riverside Drive 

Columbia University 

693 Fifth Avenue 

25 Broad Street 

198 West Street, Trenton, N. J. 

325 Boronne Street, New Orleans, La. 

The Gunnery School, Washington, Conn. 

20 Broad Street 

45 West 74th Street 

1419 F Street, Washington, D. C. 

424 California Street, San Francisco, Calif. 

1502 West 9th Street, Des Moines, Iowa 

62 West 92d Street 

I East 79th Street 

5 Nassau Street 

Ellwood Place, Kinker Heights, St. Louis, Mo. 

Kenosha, Wis. 

141 Broadway 

146 Broadway 

t6o West 59th Street 

28 Beaver Street 

Croker Building. San Francisco, Calif. 

33 Pine Street 

1421 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

State Bank Building, Tonopah, Nev. 

Berlin Mills Co., Portland, Me. 

59 Wall Street 

56 Munn Avenue, East Orange, N. J. 

Corn Exchange Bank Building, Chicago, 111. 

350 Post Road, San Francisco, Calif. 

Scottsville, N. Y. 

45 Wall Street 

r West 72d Street 

310 West 95th Street 



* Life Member. 



(13) 



14 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Brundrett, E. L. 
Bruton, John F. 
Bryan, J. Wallace, 
Bryant, Hughes 
Bryant, W. Sidney, jr 
Buck, Walter H. 
Buckley. William W. 
Buckner, M. N. 
Budington, Ernest G. 
Buhler, Conrad 
Bullock, Charles E. 
Bullock, George 
Bullowa, F. E. M. 
Bunker, Albert 
Burden, James A. 
Burdick, F. M. 
Burdick, William 
Burges, William H. 
Burgess, John W. 
Burke, Charles E. 
Burke, Thomas 
Burns, Edward 
Burns, William J. 
Burr, A. G. 
Burr, Mrs. Winthrop 
Burrows, William H. 
Burt, Silas W. 
Busch, Adolphus 
Bush, Irving T. 
Bustamante, Antonio S. de 
Butler, Charles Stewart 
Butler, Joseph G., jr. 
Butler, Nicholas Murray 
Butler, William W. S. 
Byrne, James 
Cabot, Mrs. Francis H. 
Cadwalader, John L. 
Cahn, Arthur L. 
Cahn, William L. 
Calder, John 
Caldwell, James H. 
Caldwell, R. J. 
Calhoun, Patrick 
Calkins, Earnest Elmo 
Calkins, John U. 
Cammann, Hermann H. 
Canfield, George F. 
Cannon, James G. 
Carey, Mrs. Francis Kiney 



52d Street & Sunset Drive, Kansas City, Mo. 

Wilson, N. C. 
521 Roland Ave., Roland Park, Baltimore Co., Md. 

Kansas City, Mo. 

200 Fifth Avenue 

1400 Continental Building, Baltimore, Md. 

141 Broadway 

26 Broad Street 

32 Nassau Street 

453 Broome Street 

Canton, Pa. 

40 Wall Street 

22 Nassau Street 

97 Hudson Terrace, Yonkers, N. Y. 

Troy, N. Y. 

Colum.bia University 

602 Continental Building, Baltimore, Md. 

2 Republic Building, El Paso, Texas 

323 West S7th Street 

40 Pollock Avenue, Pittsfield, Mass. 

408 Burke Building, Seattle, Wash. 

904 President Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

811 First National Bank Building, Chicago, 111. 

Rugby, N. D. 

7 Wall Street 

P. O. Box 1022, Middletown, Conn. 

216 West looth Street 

St. Louis, Mo. 

100 Broad Street 

Apartado 134, Havana, Cuba 

32 Nassau Street 

Youngstown, O. 

119 East 30th Street 

Stockton. Calif. 

24 Broad Street 

37 East 7Sth Street 

40 Wall Street 

27 Pine Street 

III Broadway 

129 Ferry Avenue, East, Detroit, Mich. 

Care of Troy Trust Co., Troy, N. Y. 

55 Walnut Street, Montclair, N. J. 

30 Broad Street 

250 Fifth Avenue 

2347 Prospect Street, Berkeley, Calif. 

84 William Street 

49 Wall Street 

Fourth National Bank 

509 Cathedral Street, Baltimore, Md. 

(M) 



No. i] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



15 



Carlebach, Walter M. 
Carlton, Newcomb 
Carnegie, Andrew 
Carnochan, William E. 
Carpenter, Herbert S. 
Carrington, A. B. 
Carstens, C. C. 
Carstenson, John 
Carter, Jarvis P. 
Carvalho, S. S. 
Casady, Simon 
Chadbourne, Thomas L., 
Chamberlain, Joseph P. 
Chandler, Percy M. 
Channing, J. Parke 
Chapman, James M. 
Chase, George 
Cheney, O. H. 
Chesebrough, Robert A. 
Chew, Ng Poon 
Childs, Edwards H. 
Childs, R. S. 
Childs, William, jr. 
Childs, William H. 
Choate, Joseph H. 
Church, William C. 
Cillis, Hubert 
Claflin, John 
Oancy, John R. 
Clare, William F. 
Clark, David T. 
Clark, Emory W. 
Clark, John Bates 
Clark, J. M. 
Clark, LeRoy 
Clark, Russell Porter 
Clark, Thomas F. 
Clark, V. V. 
Clark, Walter E. 
Clark, William Andrews 
Clark, W. R. 
Clarke, E. A. S. 
Clarke, Frederick H. 
Qarke, Howard 
Clarke, Lewis L. 
Clarke, Samuel B. 
Qarkson, David A. 
Clement, S. M. 
Cleveland, F. A. 



136 West 86th Street 

131 East 66th Street 

2 East 91st Street 

52 William Street 

71 Broadway 

200 Broadway 

43 Mt. Vernon Street, Boston, Mass. 

526 Grand Central Terminal 

52 William Street 

Metuchen, N. J. 

Central State Bank, Des Moines, la. 

jr. 14 Wall Street 

Kent Hall, Columbia University 

3d & Walnut Streets, Philadelphia, Pa. 

S Broadway 

80 William Street 

309 West 74th Street 

78 Madison Avenue 

17 State Street 

809 Sacramento Street, San Francisco, Calif. 

59 Wall Street 
23 Fifth Avenue 

200 Fifth Avenue 
17 Battery Place 

60 Wall Street 
20 Upper Montclair Avenue, Montclair, N. J. 

20 Nassau Street 

224 Church Street 

loio West Belden Avenue, Syracuse, N. Y. 

Suite 916, 135 Broadway 

Williamstown, Mass. 

1740 Jeflferson Avenue, Detroit, Mich. 

407 West 117th Street 

Amherst, Mass. 

114 Liberty Street 

52 Grove Street, Stamford, Conn. 

195 Broadway 

444 Henry Building, Seattle, Wash. 

824 St. Nicholas Avenue 

20 Exchange Place 

2717 North Broadway, Los Angeles, Calif. 

2 Rector Street 

Z'z Nassau Street 

2 West 4Sth Street 

128 Broadway 

32 Nassau Street 

Merrick, L. L 

^2,^ Delaware Avenue, Buffalo, N. Y. 

White House, Washington, D. C. 

(15) 



i6 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Cleveland, J. Wray 
Clews, Henry- 
Close. F. K. B. 
Cochran, William F. 
Coffin, C. A. 
Coffin, W. E. 
Cogswell, Mrs. Laura K 
Cogswell, Ledyard 
Cogswell, William Browne 
Cohen, Benno 
Cohen, Julius Henry 
Cohen, William N. 
Colby, Howard A. 
Cole, Charles L. 
Cole, Edward F, 
Coleman, C. P. 
Coler, Bird S. 
Colgate, Gilbert 
Collier, Barron G. 
Colvin, D. Leigh 
Conant, Charles A. 
Conkey, H. M. 
Conklin. Roland R. 
Connor, H. G. 
Connor, Washington R 
Conway, Eustace 
Conyngton, Thomas 
Cook, Mrs. Madge Carr 
Cook, Walter W. 
Cook, William W. 
Copeland, Charles C. 
Cord, J. F. 
Cordley, F. R. 
Cornell, William H. 
Corning, C. R. 
Corrigan, Andrew 
Corrigan, J. E. 
Corwin, Edward S. 
Coshow, O. P. 
Coster, Miss Helen 
Cotton, Joseph P., jr. 
Couden, Elliott R. 
Coulter, Elmer Dean 
Cowperthwait, J. Howard 
Cox, Jennings S. 
Cox, Robert Lynn 
Coykendall, S. D. 
Crain, Thomas C. T. 
Cram, Ralph Adams 



176 Broadway 

15 Broad Street 

7 Wall Street 

Woodbrook, Md. 

30 Church Street 
902 Seventh Street, Des Moines, la. 

250 West 84th Street 

318 State Street, Albany, N. Y. 

Syracuse, N. Y. 

308 West 94th Street 

15 William Street 

22 William Street 

Plainfield, N. J. 

49 Wall Street 

Times Building, Broadway & 42d Street 

57th Street and Broadway 

43 Cedar Street 

306 West 76;h Street 

Flat Iron Building, Broadway & 23d Street 

655 West 177th Street 

34 Nassau Street 

83 Cedar Street 

I Wall Street 

Bruton & Gray Streets, Wilson, N. C. 

31 Nassau Street 
127 East 35th Street 

20 Vesey Street 

302 West 77lh Street 

University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, 111. 

44 Wall Street 

Red Bank, N. J. 

Carlotte Hall, Md. 

324 West 103d Street 

34 Nassau Street 

36 Wall Street 

140 Kansas Street, San Francisco, Calif. 

52 West 9th Street 

115 Prospect Avenue, Princeton, N. J. 

Roseburg, Ore. 

Z7 East 37th Street 

165 Broadway 

Ridgewood National Bank, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

261 West 44th Street 

2222 Third Avenue 

319 West 8oth Street 

I Madison Avenue 

Rondout, N. Y. 

121 West 7Sth Street 

15 Beacon Street, Boston, Mass. 

(16) 



No. i] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



17 



Crane, Alexander B. 
Crane, Charles R. 
Cravath, Paul D. 
Craven, W. R. 
Crawford, Miss Caroline 
Crawford, Hanford 
Crawford, W. 
Creel, Enrique C. 
Crider, George A. 
Croll-Blackburne, Mrs. Ida 
Croly, Herbert, 
Crook, J. W. 
Crow, Allen B. 
Crowell, John Franklin 
Crumplin, Cecil D. 
Culbertson, John J. 
Cummins, Albert B. 
Curtis, Bracey 
Curtis. W. E. 
Curtiss, Frederic H. 
Cutcheon, F. W. M. 
Cutler, James G. 
Cutting, Churchill H. 
Cutting, Elizabeth B. 
Cutting, R. Bayard 
Cutting, R. Fulton 
Dailey, John E. 
Dakin, Arthur H. 
Dashew, Leon D. 
Davey, W. N. 
Davis, Andrew McF. 
Davis, Daniel A. 
Davis, David T., 
Davis, Frank M. 
Davis, G. Richard 
Davis, Harrison M. 
Davis, J. Lionberger 
Davis, John A. 
Davis, Pierpont V. 
Davis, Robert E. 
Davis, Vernon M. 
Davison, H. P. 
Dawson, Edgar 
Dawson, Miles M. 
Dealey, James Quayle 
Debevoise, Thomas M. 
DeBoer, Joseph Arend 
Decker, Mrs. J. W. 
Decker, Martin S. 



55 Wall Street 

31 West I2th Street 

52 William Street 

108 South Main Street, Dayton, O. 

Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vt. 

Care of Boatmen's Bank, St. Louis, Mo. 

10 West 20th Street 

3a de Londres, No. 40, Mexico City, Mex. 

Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pa. 

P. 519 South 41st St., West Phila., Pa. 

Windsor, Vt. 

Amherst, Mass. 

604 West 114th Street 

17 West 91st Street 

167 Beech Street, Arlington, N. J. 

Paris, Texas 

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. 

Nogales, Ariz. 

30 Broad Street 

63 Bay State Road, Boston, Mass. 

24 Broad Street 

Cutler Building, Rochester, N. Y. 

37 Madison Avenue 

37 Madison Avenue 

32 Nassau Street 

32 Nassau Street 

35 Wall Street 

Amherst, Mass. 

80 St. Nicholas Avenue 

584 Central Avenue, East Orange, N. J. 

10 Appleton Street, Cambridge, Mass. 

52 West 57th Street 

55 Liberty Street 

145 West 58th Street 

135 Broadway 

75 Ames Building, Boston, Mass. 

Third National Bank Building, St. Louis, Mo. 

Z"? Fifth Avenue 

851 N. Broad Street, Elizabeth, N. J. 

Gainesville, Fla. 

194 Lenox Avenue 

23 Wall Street 

Normal College 

141 Broadway 

Brown University, Providence, R. L 

62 Cedar Street 

Montpelier, Vt. 

51 West 54th Street 

Public Service Commission, Albany, N. Y. 

(17) 



i: 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Deemer, Horace E. 
de Forest, H. W. 
de Forest, Robert W. 
DeKay, John W. 
Delano, S. S. 
Delano, William Adams 
Delmar, Eugene 
Deming, Horace E. 
Demorest, William C. 
Denison, John D., jr. 
Denison, Winifred T. 
Dennis, Alfred L. P. 
Dennis, James S. 
Dennis, John B. 
Depew, Chauncey M. 
Derby, James Lloyd 
de Roode, Albert 
Derrick, Calvin 
DeSanno, A. P. 
Devine, Edward T. 
Dey, Donald 
Dick, J. Henry 
Dickinson, A. Lowes 
Diefenthaler, Charles E. 
Dillon, John F. 
Dimock, George E. 
Dimse, Henry 
Dittenhoefer, Miss Estelle 
Dodd, Allison 
Dodd, W. F. 
Dodge, Geveland H. 
Dodge, Miss Grace H. 
Doherty, Henry L. 
Dommerich, L. W. 
Donald, James M. 
Donovan, H. W. 
Doremus, R. P. 
Dorr, Goldthwaite, H. 
Doty, Mrs. Alvah H. 
Dougherty, J. Hampden 
Douglas, James 
Douglas, Walter 
Dow, Miss Caroline B. 
Dowling, Victor J. 
Draper, George Otis 
Draper, Mrs. William P. 
Drayton. J. Coleman 
Dreicer, Mrs. Michael 
Dreier, Miss Mary E. 



Red Oak, la. 

30 Broad Street 

7 Washington Square 

III Broadway 

165 Broadway 

4 East 39th Street 

311 West 70th Street 

15 William Street 

60 Liberty Street 

Bradley Building, Dubuque, Iowa 

Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. 

518 Wisconsin Avenue, Madison, Wis. 

Box 17s, Montclair, N. J. 

P. O. Box 1792 

27 West 54th Street 

925 Park Avenue 

52 Wall Street 

Freeville, N. Y. 

1232 Race Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

607 Kent Hall, Amsterdam Ave. & ii6th Street 

201 DeWitt Street, Syracuse, N. Y. 

20 East 53d Street 

52 William Street 

190 Franklin Street 

195 Broadway 

907 North Broad Street, Elizabeth, N. J. 

874 Broadway 

17 East 83d Street 

307 Belleville Avenue, Bloomfield, N. J. 

University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. 

99 John Street 

262 Madison Avenue 

60 Wall Street 

314 West 75th Street 

9 Nassau Street 

7 Wall Street 

42 Broadway 

521 West iiith Street 

120 West 57th Street 

27 William Street 

99 John Street 

Bisbee, Ariz. 

3 Gramercy Park 

27 Madison Avenue 

I Madison .A.venue 

Hotel Gotham, Fifth Avenue & 55th Street 

829 Park Avenue 

1046 Fifth Avenue 

6 Montague Terrace, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

(18) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



19 



Dresser, Gardiner S. 
Drury, Frank A. 
DuBois, Charles G. 
Duggan, Stephen Pierce 
Dulaney, Henry S. 
Dulles, William 
Dummer, Mrs. W. F. 
Duncan, R D. 
Dunham, Carroll 
Dunham, Edward K.* 
Dunn, Henry E. 
Dunning, William 
Dunstan, J. S. 
Dupuis, Charles W. 
Durham, Knowlton 
Duval, H. Rieman 
Dwight, John E. 
Earle, J. Walter 
Earp, Edwin L. 
Easley, Ralph M. 
Eastman, George 
Eastman, Joseph 
Eastman, Lucius R., jr. 
Eastman, Samuel C. 
Easton, Robert T. B. 
Eaton, Arthur W. 
Eaton, Frederick H. 
Eddy, Charles B. 
Eder, James M. 
Edison, Thomas A. 
Edmonds, Dean S. 
Edmonds, Franklin S. 
Edwards, Daniel M. 
Edwards, Stephen O. 
Egleston, Melville 
Ehrich, Samuel W. 
Eickhoff, Henry 
Eidlitz, Ernest F. 
Eidlitz, Otto M. 
Eisman, Max 
Eldridge, Frederick L. 
Eldridge, S. 
Elkus, Abram I. 
Elliott, L. L. 
Ellis, George W. 
Ellis, Ralph 
Ellsworth, William W. 
Ely, Robert E. 
Emery, Thomas 



71 Broadway 
Merchants National Bank, Worcester, Mass. 

15 Dey Street 

College of the City of New York 

517 W. Lombard Street, Baltimore, Md. 

220 Fifth Avenue 

679 Lincoln Parkway, Chicago, 111. 

Care of State Trust Company, Little Rock, Ark. 

Irvington-on-Hudson, N. Y. 

35 West 68th Street 

S3 East 79th Street 

Columbia University 

42 Broadway 

Western German Bank, Cincinnati, U. 

I Gramercy Park 

2,2 Nassau Street 

33 Mount Morris Park West 

293 Broadway 

Drew Forest, Madison, N. J. 

I Madison Avenue 

350 East Avenue, Rochester, N. Y. 

71 Broadway 

375 Washington Street 

Concord, N. H. 

29 Broadway 

Pittsfield, Mass. 

165 Broadway 

62 Cedar Street 

251 West 95th Street 

Orange, N. J. 

166 West 72d Street 

7818 Lincoln Drive, Philadelphia, Pa. 

208 Salina Street, Syracuse, N. Y. 

170 Westminster Street, Providence, R. L 

26 Cortlandt Street 

25 Broad Street 

604 Mills Building, San Francisco, Calif. 

31 Nassau Street 

489 Fifth Avenue 

I West 70th Street 

580 Fifth Avenue 

244 East 105th Street 

170 Broadway 

311 West Third Street, Los Angeles, Calif. 

149 Broadway 

22 West 57th Street 
2,3 East 17th Street 

23 West 44th Street 
Grand Central Station 

(19) 



20 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Erb, Newman 
Erbsloh, R. 
Erdmann, Albert J. 
Essing, Arthur 
Estabrook, A. F. 
Estabrook, H. D. 
Evans, Nelson W. 
Evans, Rowland 
Ewing, Thomas, jr. 
Eyer, George A. 
Fai'^banks, Charles W. 
Fairchild, Charles S. 
Fairchild, Samuel W. 
Fairlie, John A. 
Fallows, Edward H. 
Fancher, B. H. 
Farley, Terence 
Farnsworth, Fred. E. 
Farquhar, A. B. 
Farrel, Mrs. John Truitt 
Farrell, James A. 
Farrelly, Stephen 
Fay, Charles R. 
Fenwick, Charles G. 
Ferguson, Mrs. F. 
Ferguson, Henry 
Ferris, Frank A. 
Field, E. B. 
Fieldman, Sol 
Finley, John H. 
Findley, William L. 



42 Broadway 

564 Broadway 

30 Broad Street 

44 West 91st Street 

15 State Street, Boston, Mass. 

115 Broadway 

Portsmouth, O. 

221 Federal Building, Indianapolis, Ind. 

67 Wall Street 

2,7 Wall Street 

Indianapolis, Ind, 

35 Fifth Avenue 

P. O. Box 1 120 

1004 South Lincoln Avenue, Urbana, 111. 

30 Church Street 

530 Fifth Avenue 

Hall of Records 

II Pine Street 

York, Pa. 

47 Elm Street, Morristown, N. J. 

71 Broadway 

182 West 58th Street 

119 Montague Street, Brooklyn 

2 Jackson Place, Washington, D. C. 

Box 71, Halesite, Suffolk County, N. Y. 

123 Vernon Street, Hartford, Conn. 

262 Mott Street 

P. O. Drawer 1708, Denver, Colo. 

514 West 114th Street 

College of the City of New York 

125 Riverside Drive 



Fischer, W. J. National Bank of Commerce Building, St. Louis, Mo. 

Fish, Frederick P. 84 State Street, Boston, Mass. 

Fish, Mrs. John C. 19 South Broadway, Shelby, O. 

Fisher, Frederick A. 71 Central Street, Lowell, Mass. 

Fisher, Mrs. Harriet White 125 East Hanover Street, Trenton, N. J. 

Fisher, Irving 460 Prospect Street, New Haven, Conn. 

Fisher, Irving R. 67 West soth Street 

Fisk, Everett C. 2a Park Street, Boston, Mass. 

Fisk, Pliny 62 Cedar Street 

Fiske, Amos K. 7 West 43d Street 

Fiske, Haley i Madison Avenue 

Fitzpatrick, Miss Mary Coghlan 885 Kent Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Fitzwilson, W. G. 11 Pine Street 

P'lagler, J. H. 200 Broadway 

Fleming, Henry S. i Broadway 

Fleitmann, Frederick T. 490 Broome Street 

Fletcher, Austin B. 165 Broadway 

Flexner, Bernard Paul Jones Building, Louisville, Ky. 

(20) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



21 



Flinn, Rev. Victor ( 
Flint, Charles R. 
Floyd, Mrs. Nelson 
Follett, A. D. 
Folsom, Henry T. 
Foote, Allen R. 
Forbes, Allen B. 
Fordham, H. L. 
Fordyce, S. W. 
Forster, William 
Forsyth, Ralph K. 
Fort, John Franklin 
Fosdick, 'Raymond B. 
Fowler, Mrs. Anderson 
Fowler, Carl H. 
Fox, Alan 
Fox, Hugh F. 
Fox, William H. 
Fraenkel, Osmond K. 
Frame, Andrew J. 
Frankfort, M. 
Frankfurter, Felix 



39 East 42d Street 

4 East 36th Street 

Syosset, L. I. 

St. Clair Building, Marietta, O. 

Llewellyn Park, Orange, N. J. 

334 Chamber of Commerce Building, Columbus, O. 

56 William Street 

III Broadway 

703 Commonwealth Trust Building, St. Louis, Mo. 

59 Wall Street 

41 Pearl Street, Kingston, N. Y. 

Essex Building, Newark, N. J. 

854 West 181 st Street 

60 East 68[h Street 

55 Liberty Street 

50 Pine Street 

109 East 15th Street 

Taunton, Mass. 

Lawrence Avenue, Lawrence, L. L 

303 Grand Avenue, Waukesha, Wis. 

15 East 48th Street 

Bureau of Insular Affairs, Washington, D. C. 



Frankland, Frederick William * 

" Okataina," Foxton, Manawatu, New Zealand 
527 West iioth Street 
Z2, East 38th Street 
San Antonio, Texas 
Home Trust Co., Hoboken, N. J. 
25 Maple Avenue, New Rochelle, N. Y. 
20 Exchange Place 



Franklin, Fabian 
Franklin, George S. 
Franklin, Thomas H. 
Franks, Robert A. 
Frantz, J. F. 
Eraser, George C. 
Freiberg, Maurice J. 
Frelinghuysen, G. G. 
French, John 
French, Nathaniel 
Freund, Sanford E. H. 
Frew, Walter E. 
Frick, Henry C. 
Friedman, H. G. 
Fries, F. H. 
Frissell, A. S. 
Froment, Frank L. 
Frothingham, John W. 
Frueauff, Charles A. 
Fuller, Paul 
Furnya, M. 
Gaillard, William D. 
Gallaher, E. Y. 
Gallatin, Albert 
Gallatin, Francis D. 



3576 Alaska Avenue, Cincinnati, O. 
32 Liberty Street 

59 Wall Street 
Davenport, la. 

115 Broadway 

13 William Street 

640 Fifth Avenue 

66 West 94th Street 

Winston-Salem, N. C. 

530 Fifth Avenue 

52 East 74th Street 

14 Wall Street 

60 Wall Street 
2 Rector Street 

216 Second Ave , S., Seattle, Wash. 

42 Broadway 

814 West End Avenue 

7 East 76th Street 

119 East 38th Street 



(21) 



22 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Gammell, William 
Gans, Mrs. Howard S. 
Garanflo, W. H. 
Gardiner, Robert H. 
Gardner, Henry B. 
Gardner, Rathbone 
Garfield, H. A. 
Garrett, Robert 
Garst, Julius 
Garvan, Francis P. 
Gavegan, Edward J. 
Gavegan, Mrs. Edward J. 
Gear, George J. 
Geeting, John F. 
Gellatly, William 
Gerard, James W. 
Gettell, Raymond G. 
Giberga, Eliseo 
Gibson, H. W. 
Gifford, James M. 
Gilbert, Alexander 
Gilbreth, Frank B. 
Gildersleeve, Henry A. 
Gildersleeve, Louis 
Gildersleeve, Ferdinand 
Gillespie, Robert McM. 
Gillette, King C. 
Gillies, Edwin J. 
Gillin, John Lewis 
Gilluby, George K. 
Gilpin, William Jay 
Giltner, E. E 
Girelius, Charles G. 
Glasson, William H. 
Gleason, Carlisle J. 
Glenn, John M. 
Goan, Mrs. Orrin S. 
Goetze, Frederick A. 
Golding, John N. 
Goldman, Henry 
Goldzier, Morris 
Gompers, Samuel 
Gonzalez, Antonio C. 
Gonzales, Teodosio 
Goodhart, Mrs. Albert E. 
Goodhart, Philip J. 
Goodnow, F. J. 
Gordon, Armistead C. 
Gordon, F. E. 



50 South Main Street, Providence, R. L 

401 West End Avenue 

State National Bank, Little Rock, Ark. 

Gardiner, Me. 

54 Stimson Avenue, Providence. R. L 

ID Weybosset Street, Providence, R. I. 

Williamstown, Mass. 

506 Continental Building, Baltimore, Md. 

Worcester, Mass. 

119 East 31st Street 

303 West End Avenue 

303 West End Avenue 

23 East 64th Street 

Norwood Park, Chicago, HI. 

Cranford, N. J. 

165 Broadway 

74 Vernon Street, Hartford, Conn. 

Prado 10, Havana, Cuba 

167 Tremont Street, Boston, Mass. 

5 Nassau Street 

Market and Fulton National Bank 

60 Broadway 

28 West 48th Street 

I Broadway 

Gildersleeve, Conn. 

8 West 53d Street 

1566 Beacon Street, Boston, Mass. 

245 Washington Street 

208 Bernard Court, Madison, Wis. 

1221 Dean Street, Brooklyn 

77 Cedar Street 

418 West Ii8th Street 

Vineland, N. J. 

Trinity College, Durham, N. C. 

170 Broadway 

136 East 19th Street 

226 West 59th Street 

Columbia University 

9 Pine Street 

60 Wall Street 

657 Broadway 

801 G. Street, N. W., Washington. D. C. 

2,2 Broadway 

Bermeys 321, Asuncion, Paraguay 

2 East 55th Street 

96 Broadway 

Columbia University 

Staunton, Va. 

West Main Street, Conneaut, O. 

(22) 



No. 1] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



23 



Gordon, W. S. 
Gore, Thomas P. 
Gorton, Adelos 
Gould, E. R. L. 
Gould, Horace S. 
Govin, Antonio 
Gowan-Stoba, John 
Gram, Jesse P. 
Grant, Percy Stickney 
Grant, WilHam T. 
Graves, E. W. 
Graves, Nelson Z. 
Gray, E. McQueen 
Gray, Henry G. 
Gray, R. S. 
Green, Herbert 
Green, James M. 
Green, Warren L. 
Greene, Francis V. 
Greene, John Arthur 
Greene, William H. 
Greene, Richard T. 
Greenhut, Benedict J. 
Greeno, F. L. 
Greenough, William 
Gregory, R. H. 
Grenfell, Wilfred T. 
Griffin, Frederick R.* 
Griggs, Edward Howard 
Griggs, Herbert L. 
Grinnell, E. Morgan 
Griswold, Chester 



68 Leonard Street 

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. 

Maple Glen, Montgomery Co., Pa. 

15 West 38th Street 

37 Wall Street 

70 Dragones Street, Havana, Cuba 

1735 McCormick Building, Chicago, 111. 

34 Nassau Street 

7 West loth Street 

106 Central Park West 

First National Bank, Douglas, Ariz. 

22-24 South Third Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, N. Mex. 

49 Wall Street 

3535 Telegraph Avenue, Oakland, Calif. 

1023 People's Gas Building, Chicago, 111. 

State Normal School, Trenton, N. J. 

70 Broad Street 

303 North Street, Buffalo, N. Y. 

100 Washington Square 

Arch & i6th Streets, Philadelphia, Pa. 

544 West 114th Street 

Sixth Avenue & i8th Street 

909 Wilder Building, Rochester, N. Y. 

55 Wall Street 

463 West Street 

14 Beacon Street, Boston, Mass. 

Sherbrooke & Simpson Sts., Montreal, Canada 

Spuyten Duyvil, N. Y. 

48 Wall Street 

Zd East 50th Street 

250 West 54th Street 



Groom, Wallace P. 

Academy of Music Bldg., Lafayette Ave. & Fulton St., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
Grossman, Moses H. 115 Broadway 

Grover, James H. Mortgage Trust Co., 124 North 4th St., St. Louis, Mo. 
Gubelman, Oscar L. 15 William Street 

165 Broadway 

593 Broadway 

725 Broadway 

391 Fifth Avenue 

515 West I nth Street 

28 Park Avenue 

II Broadway 

335 Convent Avenue 

44 West 69th Street 

2 Rector Street 

545 Mt. Prospect Avenue, Newark, N. J. 

I Wall Street 

{21) 



Guggenheim, Simon 
Guinzburg, A. M. 
Guinzburg, Victor 
Gunther, Franklin L. 
Guthrie, W. B. 
Guthrie, William D. 
Gutierrez, Valeriano 
Guy, Charles L. 
Guye, Charles Henry 
Gwinn, Ralph W. 
Gwinnell, William B. 
Gwynn, Joseph K. 



24 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Haas, Kalman 
Haas, W. D. 
Hackett, Corcellus H. 
Hadley, Miss Edith M. 
Haeselbarth, Adam C. 
Hager, William M. 
Hagerman, H. J. 
Hagner, A. B. 
Haines, Charles Grove 
Hale, Ledyard P. 
Hale, George D. 
Hale, Robert L. 
Hall, Frederick J. 
Hall, John R. 
Hall, Thomas C. 
Halladay, Reginald 
Halligan, Howard A. 
Ham, Arthur H. 
Hamburger, L. 
Hamilton, Foster 
Hamilton, John L. 
Hamlin, Philip 
Hammill, C. W. 
Hammond, Henry B. 
Hammond, John Hays 
Hammond, Mrs. John Hays 
Hammond, John Henry 
Hanaman, Charles E. 
Handy, Parker D. 
Hanford, H. B. 
Hanna, Charles A. 
Hansmann, Carl A. 
Hardings, W. P. 
Hardon, Henry W. 
Hardy, Sarah B. 
Harkins, Walter S. 
Harkness, W. L. 
Harmon, William E. 
Harned, Franklin M. 
Harper, J. Henry 
Harper, R. A. 
Harriman, Mrs. J. Borden 
Harris, Albert H. 
Harris, John F. 
Harrison, W. Z. 
Hart, Hastings H. 
Hartshorn, Stewart 
Hartzell, Charles 
Harvey, George 



7 East 69lh Street 

Bunkie, La. 

31 Union Square 

57 West 7.3d Street 

Leonia, N. J. 

165 Broadway 

Roswell, New Mexico 

1818 H Street, Washington, D. C. 

Whitman College, Walla Walla, Wash. 

Capitol, Albany, N. Y. 

1059 Lake Avenue, Rochester, N. Y. 

163 East 36th Street 

4 Benedict Avenue, Tarrytown, N. Y. 

100 Broadway 

Union Theological Seminary 

Englewood, N. J. 

463 West Street 

Room 1606, 31 Union Square 

91 Fifth Avenue 

The Bank of Alabama, Ensley, Ala. 

Hoopestown, 111. 

Telephone Building, Denver, Colo. 

71 Broadway 

51 Chambers Street 

71 Broadway 

2315 Massachusetts Ave., Washington, D. C. 

40 Wall Street 

P. O. Box, 527, Troy, N. Y. 

22 Pine Street 

633 Cooper Street. Camden, N. J. 

IS Rockledge Avenue, Montclair, N. J. 

96 Broadway 

First National Bank, Birmingham, Ala. 

60 Wall Street 

419 West iiSth Street 

Presbonsburg, Ky. 

12 Broadway 

261 Broadway 

266 Lincoln Road, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Franklin Square 

2936 Bainbridge Avenue 

35 East 49th Street 

135 Central Park West 

15 Wall Street 

Commercial Club, Salt Lake City, Utah 

105 East 22d Street 

Short Hills, N. J. 

San Juan, Porto Rico 

Care of Harper Brothers, Franklin Square 

(24) 



No. i] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



25 



Haskell, J. Amory 
Haskin, Lincoln B. 
Hasslacher, Jacob 
Hastings, H. S. 
Hatch, A. J. 
Hatch, Edward W. 
Hatfield, Charles E. 
Hathaway, Charles 
Havemeyer, F. C. 
Hawkins, Eugene D. 
Hawley, J. S., jr. 
Hay, Woodhull, 
Haynes, John R. 
Hazard, F. R. 
Hazeltine, H. D. 
Healy, A. Augustus 
Heaney, Frank J. 
Hebbard, Edgar C. 
Hecker, Frank J. 
Hedges, Job E. 
Heffner, William Clinton 
Heller, Max 
Heller, William H. 
Henderson, Edward C. 
Hendrix, Eugene R. 
Henry, Philip W. 
Hentz, Henry 
Hepburn, A. Barton 
Hepburn, Mrs. A. Barton 
Herczeg, Josika 
Hermann, Ferdinand 
Herring, Hubert C. 
Herrman, Henry S. 
Herrod, H. E. 
Hersey, Roscoe M. 
Hershey, Omer F. 
Hertenstein, Frederick 
Heyman, David M. 
Hicks, F. C. 
Hiester, A. V. 
Higbie, Robert W. 
Higby, Chester P. 
Higginson, Henry L. 
Highsaw, J. L. 
Hill, Edward Finch 
Hill, James J. 
Hill, William Burr 
Hillhouse, Mrs. James 
Hillard, C. W. 



Room 1609, 140 Cedar Street 

59 Main Street, Hempstead, N. Y. 

100 William Street 

St. Mark's, Elk Co., Pa. 

20 Broad Street 

37 Wall Street 

West Newton, Mass. 

45 Wall Street 

34 East 37th Street 

51 East 67th Street 

3530 Third Street, San Diego, Calif. 

164 East 6ist Street 

2324 South Figueroa, Los Angeles, Calif. 

P. O. Box 2, Syracuse, N. Y. 

Emmanuel College, Cambridge, England 

70 Gold Street 

351 Canal Street 

28 Nassau Street 

915 Union Trust Building, Detroit, Mich. 

165 Broadway 

922 South 46th Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

1828 Morengo Street, New Orleans, La. 

400 West End Avenue 

52 William Street 

3242 Norledge Place, Kansas City, Mo. 

25 Broad Street 

22 William Street 

83 Cedar Street 

205 West 57th Street 

28 West loth Street 

20 East 80th Street 

287 Fourth Avenue 

54 East 80th Street 

National Metal Trades Association, Cleveland, O. 

Young Men's Christian Ass'n, Tientsin, China 

Mt. Washington, Md. 

3870 iReading Road, Avondale, Cincinnati, O. 

314 West 87th Street 

7 Wall Street 

320 Race Avenue, Lancaster, Pa. 

Highland Avenue, Jamaica, L. L 

210 Newton Street, Fairmount, W. Va. 

44 State Street, Boston, Mass. 

Central High School, Memphis, Tenn. 

ZZZ Nelson Avenue, Peekskill, N. Y. 

Great Northern Railway Building, St. Paul, Minn. 

160 Broadway 
Sachem's Wood, New Haven, Conn. 
71 Broadway 
(25) 



26 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Hine, Francis L. 
Hines, W. D. 
Hinsdale, E. B. 
Hirsch, Morris J. 
Hirsch, Robert B. 
Hirth, Friedrich 
Hitchcock, Frederick S. 
Hoadley, Horace G. 
Hoagland, Joseph C. 
Hochschild, B. 
Hodgman, George B. 
Hoe, Mrs. Robert 
Hoggson, W. J. 
Holbrook, Percy 
Holcomb, Alfred E. 
Holden, Arthur J. 
Hollister, George Clay 
Hollister, Granger A. 
Holloway, Harry D. 
Holly, Miss Mary Kissam 
Holmes, John Haynes 
Holstein, George M. 
Holt, Lucius H. 
Holter, Edwin O. 
Homer, C. S. 
Hopf, Harry Arthur 
Hopkins, Arthur T. 
Hopkins, George B. 
Hopkins, W. J. 
Hoppin, William W. 
Hornblower, William B. 
Horst, George D. 
Horton, Lydiard 
Hothron, E. G. 
Hottenstein, Marcus S. 
Hough, Warwick M. 



2 Wall Street 

52 William Street 

Hotel Manhattan 

160 Broadway 

Stamford, Conn. 

401 West ii8th Street 

Box 202, New London, Conn. 

16 Fiske Street, Waterbury, Conn. 

16 William Street 

P. O. Box 957 

806 Broadway 

180 West 59th Street 

7 East 44th Street 

The Lucerne, 79th Street & Amsterdam Ave. 

15 Dey Street 

Bennington, Vt. 

New Rochelle, N. Y. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

508 Land Title Building, Philadelphia. Pa. 

252 West 76th Street 

28 Garden Place, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

24 State Street 

West Point, N. Y. 

Mount Kisco, N. Y. 

West Townsend, Mass. 

95 Chauncey Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Mechanical Rubber Co., Cleveland, O. 

52 Broadway 

821 College Avenue, Racine, Wis. 

52 William Street 

30 Broad Street 

Reading, Pa. 

Hartley Hall, Columbia University 

42 Broadway 

Commonwealth Building, Allentown, Pa. 

Rialto Building, 4th & Olive Sts., St. Louis, Mo. 



Hourwich, Isaac A. 919 Massachusetts Ave., N. E., Washington, D. C. 



Howard, Frederick B. 
Howe, Frank E. 
Howe, James B. 
Howell, Mrs. John White 
Howell, Lsher B. 
Howell, Wilson S. 
Howison, George H. 
Howland, Horace F. 
Hoyt, Allen G. 
Hoyt, Arthur S. 
Hoyt, F. C. 
Hoyt, Theodore R. 



56 Arlington Stieet, Brockton, Mass. 

Troy, N. Y. 

22 W. Highland Drive, Seattle, Wash. 

211 Ballantine Parkway, Newark, N. J. 

Riverhead, N. Y. 

Pleasantville Station, Westchester Co., N. Y. 

2631 Piedmont Avenue, Berkeley, Calif. 

475 Fifth Avenue 

49 Wall Street 

90 West Broadway 

66 Third Avenue 

72 Gold Street 

(26) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



27 



Hubbard, Walter C. 
Hudson, Sydney D. M. 
Hulet, J. R. 

Humphreys, Alexander C 
Humphreys, Edwin W. 
Hunley, W. M. 
Hunt, Mrs. Leigh 
Huntington, Archer M. 
Huntsman, Owen B. 
Hutchison, Edward S. 
Huttig, C. H. 
Hyams, Godfrey M.* 
Hyde, Henry St. John 
Hyman, Jacob S. 
Hyman, Miss Louise 
Ichmomiya, R. 
Ikelheimer, Mrs. Henry 
lies, George * 
Imbrie, James 
ImhoflF, C. H. 
Ingham, William H. 
Ingraham, Arthur 
Irwin. I. I. 
Iselin, Adrian, jr. 
Iselin, Mrs. W. E. 
Isman, Felix 
Ivins, William M. 
Jackson, Percy 
Jacobs, Ralph K. 
James, Mrs. Arthur Curtiss 
James, Walter B. 



Coffee Exchange Building 

Bryn Mawr, Pa. 

Holbrook, Ariz. 

Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, N. J. 

406 East 85th Street 

University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va. 

563 Park Avenue 

1083 Fifth Avenue 

165 Broadway 

34 South State Street, Newton, Pa. 

St. Louis, Mo. 

P. O. Box 5104, Boston, Mass. 

210 East i8th Street 

Sea Cliff, L. I. 

49 West 56th Street 

55 Wall Street 

524 Fifth Avenue 

Park Avenue Hotel 

301 West 7Sth Street 

195 Broadway 

Algona, la. 

80 Irving Place 

San Diego, Calif. 

711 Fifth Avenue 

745 Fifth Avenue 

1328 South Pennsylvania Square, Philadelphia, Pa. 

27 William Street 

43 Cedar Street 

215 Montague Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

92 Park Avenue 

17 West 54th Street 

17 West 54th Street 



James, Mrs. Walter B. 
Janvier, Charles 

Care of Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co., New Orleans, La. 

Jarvie, James N. 66 Broadway 

Jay, Delancy K. 26 Liberty Street 

Jay, Pierre 40 Wall Street 

Jefferson, Howard McN. 80 Downing Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Jeidels, Otto Nehrenstr 2)-, Berlin, Germany 

Jenkins, Mrs. Helen Hartley 232 Madison Avenue 



Jenkins, James, jr. 
Jenks, Jeremiah W. 
Jennings, Frederic B. 
Jenswold, John, jr. 
Jess, Stoddard 
Jewett, George L. 
Johnson, Bradish G. 
Johnson, Charles P. 
Johnson, C. W. 



69 Schermerhorn Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

New York University 

86 Park Avenue 

407 Palladio Building, Duluth, Minn. 

2133 Harvard Building, Los Angeles, Calif. 

20 Fifth Avenue 

829 Park Avenue 

Navarre Building, St. Louis, Mo. 

201 High Street, Holyoke, Mass. 

(27) 



28 



VEA/e BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Johnson, Mrs. Eastman 

Johnson, F. Cort 

Johnson, Grafton 

Johnson, J. Augustus 

Johnson, John Theodore 

Johnson, Rankin 

Johnson, Remsen 

Johnston, Allen W. 

Johnston, Howard A. 

Jonas, Stephen 

Jones, Breckenridge 

Jones, Charles H. 

Jones, Dwight A. 

Jones, E. Milton 

Jones, James H. 

Joy, Edmund Steele 

Joy, Russell T. 

Judson, Harry Pratt 

Judson, Henry I. 

Juilliard, A. D. 

Kagey, C. L. 

Kahn, Otto H. 

Kalaw, Teodoro 

Kastor, Hugo 

Kaul, John L. 

Kaupas, A. 

Kebabian, George S. 

Keedy, Edwin R. 

Keep, Charles H. 

Kehew, Mrs. Mary Morton 

Kelley, David J. 



65 West 55th Street 

no North Street 

Greenwood, Ind. 

460 Scotland Road, South Orange, N. J. 

417 48th Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

2,7 Madison Avenue 

187 Broadway 

500 State Street, Schenectady, N. Y. 

180 Sumner Street, Stamford, Conn. 

50 Wall Street 

Care of Mississippi Valley Trust Co., St. Louis, Mo. 

20 Broad Street 

34 West 51st Street 

570 West 156th Street 

Box 89, R. F. D. No. I, Lakeland, Fla. 

26 Halsey Street, Newark, N. J. 

78 McDonough Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

University of Chicago, Chicago, 111. 

96 Broadway 

70 Worth Street 

Beloit, Kan. 

52 William Street 

Paco, Manila, P. L 

26-28 Cedar Street 

Birmingham, Ala. 

64 Church Street, Pittston, Pa. 

60 Wall Street 

31 West Lake Street, Chicago, 111. 

60 Broadway 

29a Chestnut Street, Boston, Mass. 

1925 Seventh Avenue 



Kelley, Mrs. Florence 106 East 19th Street 

Kellogg, J. H. Battle Creek, Mich. 

Kelly, Joseph I. 206 Northwestern University Building, Chicago, 111. 



Kellor, Miss Frances A. 
Kemmerer, Roy C. 
Kempner, Otto 
Kennett, Alfred Q. 
Kenney, James W. 
Kent, Fred I. 
Kent, Robert B. 
Kenyon, Albert J. 
Kenyon, Robert N. 
Keppelman, John Arthur 
Kerr, David S. 
Kerr, Walter 
Kidder, C. G. 
Kidder, Edward H. 
Kientzle, J. P. 



6 Montague Terrace, Brooklyn 

92 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

44 Court Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

5099 McPherson Avenue, St. Louis, Mo. 

234 Seaver Street, Roxbury, Boston, Mass. 

7 Wall Street 

Passaic, N. J. 

165 Broadway 

49 Wall Street 

540 Court Street, Reading, Pa. 

516 Quebec Bank Building, Montreal, Canada 

52 Wall Street 

27 William Street 

17 Battery Place 

2^(i East nth Street, Erie, Pa. 

(28) 



No. i] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



29 



Kilbreth, James T. 
Kirrrball, Everett 
King, Miss Elizabeth G. 
King, Landreth H. 
Kingsbury, Herbert D. 
Kingsbury, Joseph Lyman 
Kingsley, Darwin P. 
Kingsley, W. M. 
Kinsey, Oliver P. 
Kirchwey, George W. 
Klink, Miss Jane Seymour 
Knapp, Mrs. Harry K. 
Knapp, Joseph P. 



45 Broadviray 

Northampton, Mass. 

48 College Street, Providence, R. I. 

Grand Central Depot 

Care of P. Lorillard & Co., Jersey City, N. J. 

406 East Jefferson Street, Kirksville, Mo. 

346 Broadway 

45 Wall Street 

Valparaiso, Ind. 

Columbia University 

397 First Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

34 East 35th Street 

19th Street & Fourth Avenue 



Knapp, Martin A. Interstate Commerce Commission, Washington, D. C. 

Knauth, Antonio 39 West 76th Street 

Knauth, Mrs. Percival 302 West 76th Street 

Kneeland, Yale 117 East 6oth Street 

Knevels, Miss M. E. 48 Wheeler Street, West Orange, N. J. 

Knox, Arthur 198 Broadway 

Knox, Herbert Allen 198 Broadway 

Knox, William E. 128 Bowery 

Kohler, Edgar J. 31 Nassau Street 

Kohlman, Hugo 30 Broad Street 

Korsmeyer, Mrs. Frederick A. Glen Cove, L. I. 



Krech, Mrs. Alvin 
Kudlich, H. C. 
Kuhn, Arthur K. 
Kursheedt, Manuel A. 
Kurtz, William B. 
Kuser, Anthony R. 
LaFollette, W. T. 
Lake, Emma S. 
Lamar, Lucius Q. C. 
Lambert, Adrian V S. 
Lamont, Thomas W. 
Lane, Nathan, jr. 
Langeloth, Jacob 
Lapham, Mrs. J. J. 
Largey, M. S. 
Larremore, Wilbur 
Lathrop, Alanson P. 
Lauer, Edgar J. 
Lauterbach, Edward 
Lauterbach, Mrs. Edward 
Lawler, Thomas B. 
Lawrence, William W. 
Lawson, John Davison 
Leach, A. B. 
Leake, Eugene W. 



26 West 58th Street 
299 Broadway 

308 West 92d Street 

302 Broadway 

321 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia 

Bernardsville, N. J. 

Siloam Springs, Ark. 

309 West 93d Street 
P. O. Box 830, Havana, Cuba 

168 East 71st Street 

2 Wall Street 

195 Washington Park, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

P. O. Box 957, Riverside, Conn. 

46 East 67th Street 

State Savings Bank, Butte, Mont. 

32 Nassau Street 

" The Apthorp," 79th Street & Broadway 

624 Madison Avenue 

22 William Street 

761 Fifth Avenue 

70 Fifth Avenue 

22 East 47th Street 

University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo. 

149 Broadway 

239 Washington Street, Jersey City, N. J. 

(29) 



30 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Leary, Mrs. George 
Leary, William V. 
Lebermuth, I. 
LeBosky, Jacob C. 
Leckie, A. E. L. 
Lee, E. A. 
Lee, H. M. 

Leeds, Mrs. Warner Mifflin 
Leffingwell, R. C. 
LeGendre, William 
Leger, J. N. 
Legg, Chester Arthur 
Lehman, Arthur 
Lehman, Irving 
Leland, Arthur S. 
Leland, Francis L. 
Lemaghi, Louis F. 
Lemann, Monte M. 
Lesher, Arthur L. 
Lesinsky, Albert R. 
Leupp, William H. 
Leverett, George V. 
Levi, Julian Clarence 
Levy, Charles E. 
Levy, Felix H. 
Levy, Jefferson M. 
Lewis, Burdette G. 



1053 Fifth Avenue 

173 West 87th Street 

Lauderdale Post Office, St. James Parish, La. 

127 North Dearborn Street, Chicago, 111. 

Southern Building, Washington, D. C. 

Oakland Road, South Orange, N. J. 

59 Pearl Street 

II East 65th Street 

144 East 65th Street 

59 Wall Street 

Port au Prince, Haiti 

63 Board of Trade Building, Chicago, 111. 

16 William Street 

County Court House 

40 Exchange Place 

New York County National Bank 

Ccllinsville, 111. 

6317 St. Charles Avenue, New Orleans, La. 

670 Broadway 

220 Broadway 

90 Wall Street 

53 Devonshire Street, Boston, Mass. 

105 West 40th Street 

Cotton Exchange Building 

268 West 94th Street 

27 Pine Street 

tI Chambers Street 



Lewis, Charles S. 

217 Fletcher-American National Bank Building, Indianapolis, Ind. 

Lewis, George A. 31 Erie County Savings Bank, Buffalo, N. Y. 

Lewis, O. F. I35 East 15th Street 

Lewisohn, Adolph 42 Broadway 

Lewisohn, Sam A. 42 Broadway 

Lichtenstein, Alfred 171 West 71st Street 

Liebeskind, Solon J. 41 Park Row 

Liebman, David 40 East 72d Street 

Light, John H. South Norwalk, Conn. 

Lincoln, Jonathan T. Fall River, Mass. 

Lincoln, Lowell 345 Broadway 

Lindsay, John D. 34 West nth Street 

Lindsay, L. Seton 346 Broadway 

Lindsay, Samuel McCune Columbia University 

Lindsey, Ben B, Court House, Denver, Colo. 

Lingley, Richard T. 527 Fifth Avenue 
Lipman, F. L. Care of Wells Fargo Nevada Natl. Bank, San Francisco, Calif. 

Lippitt, Costello Norwich, Conn. 

Lisman, F. J. 30 Broad Street 

Lissner, M. 524 South Spring Street, Los Angeles, Calif. 

Littauer, Lucius N. 715 Broadway 

(30) 



No. i] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



31 



Littleton, Martin W. 
Livermore, Arthur L. 
Loeb, Isidor 
Loeb, Jacob M. 
Loeb, James 
Loeb, Otto S. 
Loesch, Frank J. 
Loeser, Vincent 
Loewy, Benno 
Lombardi, C. 
Loomis, Guy 
Lord, Chester S. 
Lovejoy, Owen R. 
Lovett, Robert Scott 
Low, Seth 

Low, William Oilman, jr. 
Lowden, Frank O. 
Lowry, Robert J. 
Lucas, A. B. 
Luce, H. J. 
Luce, W. A. 
Ludington, Arthur C. 
Ludlum, Clarence A. 
Lummis, Miss Eliza O'B. 
Lummis, William 
Lundien, E. M. 
Lustgarten, W. 
Lyall, William L. 
Lybyer, Albert Howe 
Lydig, Philip M. 
Lynch, Mrs. Jerome H. 
Lj'ons, Samuel Clay 
Maas, Charles O. 
Mabon, James B. 
Mabon, William 
MacArthur, Arthur F. 
MacDonald, Charles B. 
MacDonald, George 
MacDuffie, Rufus L. 
Macfarland, Charles S. 
MacGregor, Ford H. 
Machen, Arthur W., jr. 
Mackay, Clarence H. 
MacKelvie, N. Bruce 
Maclay, Mark W., jr. 
MacLean, Charles F. 
MacLean, James A. 
MacQuoid, C. \N . 
Mac Veagh, Franklin 



2 Rector Street 

30 Broad Street 

University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo. 

29 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, 111. 

52 William Street 

35 Wall Street 

ID South LaSalle Street, Chicago, 111. 

320 West io8th Street 

206 Broadway 

" The News," Dallas, Texas 

817 Carroll Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

170 Nassau Street 

105 East 22d Street 

Locust Valley, Long Island, N. Y. 

30 East 64th Street 

Bristol, R. I. 

Oregon, 111. 

Atlanta, Ga. 

Meadows, Idaho 

4 East 52d Street 

Ellsworth, Pa. 

56 West loth Street 

57 Highland Avenue, Jamaica, L. I. 

324 West 103d Street 

45 Wall Street 

Dayton, la. 

68 William Street 

349 Aycrigg Avenue, Passaic, N. J. 

153 South Cedar Avenue, Oberlin, O. 

38 East 52d Street 

58 West 58th Street 

Louisville, Ky. 
87 Nassau Street 

59 West 70th Street 

Wards Island 

II Pine Street 

71 Broadway 

315 West 90th Street 

Bronxville, N. Y. 

215 Fourth Avenue 

215 North Brooks Street, Madison, Wis. 

Central Savings Bank Building, Baltimore, Md. 

253 Broadway 

25 Broad Street 

830 Park Avenue 

5th Avenue & 130th Street 

Moscow, Idaho 

Roselle, N. J. 

2829 Sixteenth Street, Washington, D. C. 

(31) 



32 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Macy, Carleton 
Macy, Miss Carroll 
Macy, V. Everit 
Mahoney, Stephen A. 
Main, William A. 
Mairs, Mrs. E. H. 
Malkenson, Arthur L. 
Maloney, Miss Ellen 
Mandlebaum, Miss M. 
Manning, William T. 
Manning, W. W. 
Mansfield, Howard 
Marden, Francis Skiddy 
Marie, Leon 
Markle, John 
Markle, Mrs. John 
Marks, Laurence H. 
Marks, Marcus M. 
Marling, Alfred E. 
Marsh, Robert AIcC. 
Marshall, Charles C. 
Marston, Edgar L. 
Marston, Edwin S. 
Martin, Bradley, jr. 
Martin, John, 
Martin, Newell 
Martin, R. W. 
Martindale, J. B. 
Marvel, Josiah 
Marx, Otto 
Mason, Charles N. 
Mason, Lewis D. 
Masten, George H. 
Masters, Miss L. B. 
Mastin, J. Edward 
Mather, Samuel 
Mathews, George Brewster 
Mathews, J. M. 
Mathewson, Charles F. 
Matienze, Jose Nicholas 
Matthews, T. A. 
Maurice, William G. 
Maxwell, Robert 
Mayer, Julius M. 
Mayer, Levy 
McAdoo, W. G. 
McAneny, George 
McBain, Howard Lee 
McCall, John C. 



Hewlett, L. L 

" Birch Corners," Hewlett, L. I. 

68 Broad Street 

630 Dwight Street, Holyoke, xvlass. 

214 Broadway 

Irvington-on-Hudson, N. Y. 

102 Bowery 

440 Riverside Drive 

205 West 57th Street 

27 West 25th Street 

70 State Street, Boston, Mass. 

49 Wall Street 

449 Park Avenife 

I West 54th Street 

Jeddo, Pa. 

^21 Fifth Avenue 

Lawrence, L. L 

687 Broadway 

35 West 47th Street 

45 West nth Street 

34 Pine Street 

24 Broad Street 

16-22 William Street 

6 East 87th Street 

Grymes Hills, Stapleton, Staten Island, N. Y. 

20 Exchange Place 

25 Nassau Strtet 

270 Broadway 

Wilmington, Del. 

Birmingham, Ala. 

62 Cedar Street 

171 Joralemon Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

425 West Ii8th Street 

Dobbs Ferry, N. Y. 

3 Broad Street 

Western Reserve Building, Cleveland, O. 

830 Delaware Avenue, Buffalo, N. Y. 

417 Lincoln Hall, Urbana, 111. 

55 Wall Street 

3770 Calle Santa Fe, Buenos Aires, R. A. 

165 Broadway 

Hot Springs, Ark. 

334 Fourth Avenue 

43 Exchange Place 

76 West Monroe Street, Chicago, 111. 

30 Church Street 

19 East 47th Street 

Madison, Wis. 

346 Broadway 

(32) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



33 



McCarroIl, William 

McCarty, Barclay E. 

McCausland, George G. 

McCleary, James T. 

McClement, J. H. 

McCready, N. L. 

McCrum, Lloyd G. 

McElderry, H. L. 

McE'nerney, Garrett W. 

McGarrah, G. W. 

McGinley, J. R. 

McGrath, Miss Madge 

McGraw, James H. 

McGuckin, William G. 

Mcllvaine, Tompkins 

Mcintosh, C. K. 

Mclntyre, John F. 

Mclntyre, William H. 

McKeag, Edwin C. 

McKenna, Thomas P. 

McKeon, John C. 

McLaren, Kenneth K. 
McLean, A. W. 
McMahon, J. Sprigg 

McMillin, Emerson 
McNeir, George 
McNulty, William D. 
McPherson, Logan G. 
McQueen, W. 
McReynolds, J. C. 
McRoberts, Samuel 
McWilliams, Daniel W. 
Mead, Joseph H. 
Meagley, George C. 
Mehan, William A. 
Meldrim, Peter W. 
Melville, Frank, jr. 
Melvin, E. C 
Menken, S. Stanwood 
Mereness, Newton D. 
Merrick, H. F. 
Mershon, Ralph D. 
Metcalf, E. P. 
Metcalfe, Henry 
Metcalfe, J. G. 
Metz, Herman A. 
Meyer, Mrs. Aubrey Edgerton 
Meyer, Ernst C. 
Meyer, Eugene, jr. 



758 St. Mark's Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

3 South William Street 

P. O. Box 68, Kendall Green, Mass. 

30 Church Street 

135 Broadway 

38 Wall Street 

103 Park Avenue 

Talladega, Ala. 

1277 Flood Building, San Francisco, Calif. 

ZZ Wall Street 

Sooo Forbes Street, Pittsburgh, Pa. 

921 Canal Street, New Orleans, La. 

239 West 39th Street 

176 West losth Street 

52 William Street 

The Bank of California, San Francisco, Calif. 

30 Broad Street 

201 West 55th Street 

223 Somerset Street, New Brunswick, N. J. 

41 Wall Street 

Hempstead, N. Y. 

Zy Wall Street 

Lumberton, N. C. 

Dayton, Ohio 

40 Wall Street 

575 Fifth Avenue 

141 Broadway 

Bureau of Railway Economics, Washington, D. C. 

Ludowici, Ga. 

141 Broadway 

55 Wall Street 

39 South Portland Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

The County Trust Co., White Plains, N. Y. 

884 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Mass. 

Ballston Spa, N. Y. 

Savannah, Ga. 

28 Monroe Place, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Selma National Bank, Selma, Ala. 

34 West 52d Street 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Kensington, O. 

65 West 54th Street 

Atlantic National Bank, Providence, R. L 

147 Fourth Avenue 

55 Central Park West 

122 Hudson Street 

The Castle, Whitehall, N. Y. 

224 Custom House 

7 Wall Street 

(33) 



34 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Mijuef, P. 

Milburn, John G. 

Miller, George N. 

Miller, Henry F. 

Miller, James Alexander 

Miller, Samuel H. 

Miller, W. B. 

Mills, W. McMaster 

Miner, Miss Maude E. 

Mitchell, Edward Page 

Mitchell, Francis B. 

Mix, M. W. 

Mohrenstecher, G. A. 

Monroe, Robert Grier 

Montgomery, Robert H. 

Moore, John Bassett 

Moot, Adelbert 

Morawetz, Victor A. 

Mordecai, T. Moultrie 

More, C. E. 

Morgan, Miss Anne 

Morgan, George Wilson 

Morgan, J. P. 

Morgan, William Fellowes 

Morgenthau, Henry 

Morgenthau, J. C. 

Morris, Dave H. 

Morris, Henry C. 

Morrison, George Austin 

Morrow, Dwight W. 

Morse, A. E. 

Morse, Anson D. 

Morse, Edmund H. 

Mott, Howard S. 

Moulton, Irving P. 

Muchnic, Charles M. 

Muhleman, Maurice L. 

Mulry, Thomas M. 

Mundy, Floyd Woodruff 

Munn, John P. 

Munroe, Vernon 

Murphy, Franklin 

Muschenheim, Mrs. Frederick A, 

Mussey, Henry Raymond 

Myers, W. Fenton 

Myers, Nathaniel 

Myers, William S. 

Nadal, Charles C. 

Neal, Emmett O. 



Technological Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia 

i6 West loth Street 

8ii Madison Avenue' 

44 Pine Street 

i8 West 51st Street 

121 East Union Avenue, Bound Brook, N. J. 

Chattanooga, Tenn. 

753 Fifth Avenue 

38 West loth Street 

The Sun Office 

The Post Express, Rochester, N. Y. 

Dodge Mfg. Co., Mishawaka, Ind. 

Long Beach, Calif. 

26 Liberty Street 
55 Liberty Street 

Columbia University 
45 Erie County Savings Bank, Buffalo, N. Y. 

44 Wall Street 

Broad and State Streets, Charleston, S. C. 

318 Home Insurance Building, Chicago, 111. 

219 Madison Avenue 

;i2 Liberty Street 

23 Wall Street 

Arch 5, Brooklyn Bridge 

165 Broadway 

87 Nassau Street 

19 East 70th Street 

924 Marquette Building, Chicago, 111. 

27 Beaver Street 
62 Cedar Street 

223 Fourth Street, Marietta, O. 

Amherst College, Amherst, Mass. 

117 West 58th Street 

100 Broadway 

2199 Derisadero Street, San Francisco, Calif. 

800 Riverside Drive 

27 Thames Street 

543 West 2ist Street 

20 Broad Street 

18 West 58th Street 

Englewood, N. J. 

224 McWhorter Street, Newark, N. J. 

218 West 45th Street 

Columbia University 

20 Market Street, Amsterdam, N. Y. 

135 Central Park West 

17 Madison Avenue 

142 East 35th Street 

Montgomery. Ala. 

(34) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



35 



Nelson, Richard Marshall 

Nevius, David 

Newberger, A. L. 

Newborg, Leo D. 

Newcomer, Waldo 

Newton, Howard D. 

Nichols, Morton C 

Nicholson, John 

Nicoll, DeLancey 

Noble, Alfred 

Nolan, Edward C. 

Northrop, Charles P. 

Norton, Charles D. 

Nottingham, William 

Noyes, Henry T., jr. 

Nunemacher, F. C. 611-613 

Nye, Olin T. 

Oakman, Walter G. 

Obermayer, C. J. 

Ochs, Adolph S. 

O'Donnell, Miss Alice 

Oeland, Isaac R. 

Ogden, Robert C. 

Ogden, Rollo 

O'Gorman, Richard 

Ogg, Frederic A. 

Olin, John M. 

Olin, Stephen H. 

Olney, Peter B. 

Olney, Richard 

Opdyke, William S. 

Oppenheim, Edward L. 

Oppenheimer, Henry S. 

Ordway, Samuel H. 

Ortiz, Fernando 

Osborn, Mrs. Henry Fairchild 

Osborn, William Church 

Osborne, Thomas 

Osgood, Herbert L. 

Outerbridge, E. H. 

Owens, George W. 

Owens, W. W. 

Page, Alfred R. 

Page, Edward D. 

Page, Howard W. 

Page, William H. 

Paine, George H. 7 

Palmer, Henry B. 

Palmieri, F. L. 



Lillington, N. C. 

160 Fifth Avenue 

31 West 23d Street 

30 West 95th Street 

National Exchange Bank, Baltimore, Md. 

371 North Broad Street, Norwich, N. Y. 

I East 39th Street 
32 Nassau Street 

23 East 39th Street 

501 West i2oth Street 

First National Bank, Reading, Pa. 

49 St. Nicholas Place 

36 East 36th Street 

701 Walnut Avenue, Syracuse, N. Y. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Union Trust Building, Washington, D. C. 

Seneca Street, Watkins, N. Y. 

62 Cedar Street 

502 8th Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

New York Times 

320 Jones Street, Memphis, Tenn. 

189 Montague Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

125 East 56th Street 

20 Vesey Street 

51 Chambers Street 

401 Broadway, Cambridge, Mass. 

762 Langdon, Madison, Wis. 

32 Nassau Street 

68 William Street 

710 Sears Building, Boston, Mass. 

20 Nassau Street 

104 East 6sth Street 

II East 43d Street 
27 William Street 

Aguiav, 68, Havana, Cuba 

850 Madison Avenue 

71 Broadway 

Auburn, N. Y. 

526 West 150th Street 

II Broadway 

Citizens Trust Building, Savannah, Ga. 

289 Clinton Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

County Court House 

Oakland, N. J. 

32 South Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

32 Liberty Street 

18 Land Title Building, Philadelphia, Pa. 

334 Canal Street 

50 East 63d Street 

(35) 



36 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Pam, Max 
Parish, Edward C. 
Parish, Henry 
Parker, Alton B. 
Parker, Ashton 
Parker, Robert A. 
Parrish, R. L. 
Parsons, Herbert 
Parsons, John E. 
Parsons, W. L. 
Partridge, Frank H. 
Paskus, Benjamin G. 
Patterson, John L. 
Patterson, W. J. 
Pavey, Frank D. 
Payne, James M. 
Peabody, R. C. 
Pearson, F. S. 
Peaslee, Edward H. 
Peckitt, Leonard 
Peierls, Siegfried 
Penman, John Simpson 
Penrose, Stephen B. L. 
Perkins, George E. 
Perkins, George W. 
Perrin, John 480 

Perry, Mrs. William A. 
Peters, William R. 
Pettit, Franklin 
Peyser, Julius I. 
Pflum, H. Doane 
Phelan, Thomas A. 
Phelps, Ansel 
Phelps, Mrs. Marion Von 
Philips, Frederic D. 
Phillips, Louis S. 
Phoenix, Lloyd 
Pierce, Winslow S. 
Pierson, Lewis E. 
Pilat, Oliver T. 
Pinkus, Frederick S. 
Place, Ira A. 
Plant, Albert 
Piatt, Edward T. 
Piatt, Mrs. Frank H. 
Plaut, Joseph 
Plimpton, George A. 
Polk, William M. 
Pollak, Francis D. 



71 Broadway 

52 Wall Street 

52 Wall Street 

Esopus, N. Y. 

330 West 85th Street 

81 Fulton Street 

Covington, Va. 

52 William Street 

52 William Street 

Rockingham, N. C. 

140 West 69th Street 

128 Broadway 

Roanoke Rapids, N. C. 

60 Broadway 

32 Nassau Street 

1210 Virginia Street, Charleston, W. Va. 

II Broadway 

115 Broadway 

17 Washington Square, North 

Catasauqua, Pa. 

453 Broome Street 

"Holywell," Katonah, N, Y. 

41 College Avenue, Walla Walla, Wash. 

41 Union Square 

71 Broadway 

South Orange Grove Avenue, Pasadena, Calif. 

7 East 56th Street 

55 John Street 

2 Wall Street 

318 Southern Building, Washington, D. C. 

346 Broadway 

93 Front Street 

29 Wall Street 

R. 70 West 49th Street 

15 William Street 

49 Broadway 

21 East 33d Street 

IIS Broadway 

Irving Exchange National Bank 

562 West 183d Street 

103 Franklin Street 

Grand Central Station 

120 William Street 

205 West 57th Street 

242 West 74th Street 

120 William Street 

70 Fifth Avenue 

7 East 36th Street 

49 Wall Street 

(36) 



No. i] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



37 



Pollock, J. S. 
Ponipan, Maurice A. 
Pond, Oscar L. 
Poor, Ruel W. 
Porter, William H. 
Post, Abram S. 
Post, James H. 
Potter, Mrs. Blanche 
Potter, Frederick 
Potter, Mrs. Gilbert 
Powell, Henry M. 
Powell, Thomas Reed 
Powell, William H. 
Pratt, Mrs. Herbert 
Pratt, Mrs. John 
Prentice, Ezra P. 
Prentiss, William A. 
Prescott, Arthur T. 
Preston, Harold 
Price, George M. 
Price, Theodore H. 
Prim, C. A. 
Prince, John D. 
Proctor, Mrs. Charles E. 
Prosser, Seward 
Prout, Henry 
Pruyn, Robert C. 
Pryer, Charles 
Puflfer, W. M. 
Puig, Miss Louise M. 
Pulitzer, Miss Constance 
Pulitzer, Ralph 
Purdy, W. E. 
Purrington, William A. 
Putney, Edmonds 
Putney, Miss Eva 
Quackenbush, James L. 
* Quesada, Ernesto 
Quimby, Charles E. 
Quinn, John 
Quinn, Thomas J. 
Randolph, Stuart F. 
Ransom, Rastus S. 
Ransom, William L. 
Raper, C. L. 
Rappard, William E. 
Rascovar, James 
Ratcliff, J. P. 
Raven, A. A. 



606 West 2d Street, Little Rock, Ark. 

80 Avenue C 

Law Building, Indianapolis, Ind. 

200 Fifth Avenue 

23 Wall Street 

81 Fulton Street 

129 Front Street 

180 West 59th Street 

71 Broadway 

239 East 6oth Street 

51 Chambers Street 

Columbia University 

1 1 70 Broadway 

213 Clinton Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

II East 6ist Street 

32 Nassau Street 

207 Elm Street, Holyoke, Mass. 

739 North Street, Baton Rouge, La. 

605 Lowman Building, Seattle, Wash. 

202 Marcy Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

24 South William Street 

Banifay, Holmes County, Fla. 

Sterlington, Rockland Co., N. Y. 

Great Neck, L. L 

389 Fifth Avenue 

30 Church Street 
60 State Street, Albany, N. Y. 

P. O. Box 647, New Rochelle, N. Y. 

Kalamazoo, Mich. 

40a Hampton Place, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

7 East 73d Street 

17 East 73d Street 

83 Cedar Street 

43 West nth Street 

116 West 73d Street 

no West 73d Street 

362 Riverside Drive 

Libertad 946, Buenos Aires, R. A. 

278 West 86th Street 

31 Nassau Street 

2345 Valentine Avenue 

31 Nassau Street 
338 West 77th Street 

550 Riverside Drive 

Chapel Hill, N. C. 

59 Fayerweather Street, Cambridge, Mass. 

26 Beaver Street 

Cunningham, Kan. 

864 President Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

(37) 



38 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Rawles, William A. 

Read, William A. 

Redding, Miss Helen E. 

Reed, Alfred Z. 

Reed, Charles 

Reed, Frederick H. 

Reese, Richard Equitabl 

Reeves, Herbert 

Remick, William H. 

Revell, Fleming H. 

Reynolds, Mrs. James B. 

Rhoades, John Harsen 

Rhodes. R. R 

Rice, Isaac L. 

Rice, William M. J. 

Rich, Charles A. 

Richards, C. R. 

Richards, R. O. 

Richmond, T. C. 

Ridge, W. N. 

* Riker, John J. 

Ripley, E. A. 

Rives, George L. 

Robb, Mrs. N. Thayer 

Robbins, Howard C. 

Robinson, Allan 

Robinson, George B. 

Robinson, George Henry 

Robinson, Mrs. Gilbert 

Robinson, James H. 

Robinson, Nelson L. 

Rochester, Mrs. Richmond 

Rockefeller, P. A. 

Roeser, John E. 

Rogers, F. Theo. Care 

Rojas, P. Ezequiel 

Roome, William J. 

Root, Charles T. 

Root, Elihu 

Rosen, Felix 

Rosenbaum, M. 

Rosenfeld, Edward L. 

Rosenfeld, Henry L. 

Ross, Edward A. 

Ross, P. Sanford 

Rossbach, Jacob 

Rossiter, Van Wyck 

Rothbarth, H. 30 Quex Road, 

Rothschild, Maurice 



924 East 3d Street, Bloomington, Ind. 

31 Pine Street 

145 South Oxford Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

454 West I52d Street 

38 North Moore Street 

120 Riverside Drive 

e Guarantee & Trust Co., Wilmington, Del. 

55 Liberty Street 

27 Wall Street 

Riverdale-on-Hudson, N. Y. 

151 Central Park West 

66 Beaver Street 

1206 Citizens Building, 'Cleveland, O. 

5 Nassau Street 

15 West 67th Street 

320 Fifth Avenue 

Cooper Union, N. Y. 

Huron, S. Dak. 

Mendota Block, Madison, Wis. 

302 Broadway 

46 Cedar Street 

Mandan, N. Dak. 

32 Nassau Street 

35 East 64th Street 

209 Madison Avenue 

165 Broadway 

415 Broome Street 

26 Exchange Place 

541 West 124th Street 

567 West 113th Street 

435 West 119th Street 

Whitestone. L. I. 

26 Broadway 

795 St. Nicholas Avenue 

of " Philippines Free Press," Manila, P. I. 

1017 Sixteenth Street, Washington, D. C. 

loi East 57th Street 

231 West 39th Street 

Washington, D. C. 

25 Broad Street 

603 South Third Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

35 South William Street 

165 Broadway 

University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. 

277 Washington Street, Jersey City, N. J. 

55 Frankfort Street 

Nyack, N. Y. 

West Hampstead, London, N. W., England 

49 West 72d Street 

(38) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



39 



Rounds, Arthur C. 
Rowe, Louis Cass 
Rowe, William V. 
Rublee, Mrs. Juliet Barrett 
Rudd, Charming 
Rudolphy, Mrs. Gustave C. 
Rundell, Oliver S. 
Rumsey, Mrs. Charles 
Ruppert, Jacob, jr. 
Rush, Thomas E. 
Rushmore, Charles E. 
Ryle, Arthur 
Sabin, Charles H. 
Sachs, Bernard 
Sachs, Harry 
Sachs, Julius 
Sachs, Ralph L. 
Sachs, Samuel 



96 Broadway 

40 East Utica Street, Oswego, N. Y. 

133 East 38th Street 

116 East 58th Street 

15 Wall Street 

148 East 62d Street 

University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. 

Arden, Orange Co., N. Y. 

1639 Third Avenue 

71 East 90th Street 

40 Wall Street 

225 Fourth Avenue 

28 Nassau Street 

135 Central Park West 

60 Wall Street 

Teachers College, Columbia University 

28 West 22d Street 

46 West 70th Street 

49 Wall Street 



Sage, Dean 

Saggu, Mohammad Khairuddin 

Royal Colonial Institute, Northumberland Ave., London, W.C, England 

Saklatvala, P. D. 83 Grand Street 

Samson, C. F. 20 Broad Street 

Samson, Harry G. 433 Sixth Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Sanders, J. C. Fourth Street, Fort Madison, la. 

Sanguinette, S. S. 542 West 124th Street 

Sargent, William D. 90 West Street 

Satterlee, Herbert L. 37 East 36th Street 

Saul, Charles R. 149 Columbus Avenue 

Saunders, Bertram A. Nyack, N. Y. 

Saunders, Charles C. 95 Milk Street, Boston, Mass. 

Saunders, William E. G. Emmetsburg, Iowa 

Schaffer, Frank 85 Rockland Avenue, Park Hill, Yonkers, N. Y. 

Schefer, Carl 40 West 37th Street 

Schermerhorn, F. Augustus 25 Liberty Street 



Scherr, Harry 
Schiff, Jacob H. 
Schiff, Mortimer L. 
Schlapp, Max G. 
Schley, Grant B. 
Schmitt, Arthur J. 
Schniewind, H., jr. 
Scholefield, E. O. S. 
Schott, Charles M., jr. 
Scoville, Mrs. Helen M. 
Schreiber, George C. 
Schubring, E. J. B. 
Schurz, Miss Agatha 
Schuster, Edward 



Williamson, West Va. 

27 Pine Street 

William & Pine Streets 

40 East 41st Street 

80 Broadway 

1 127 Vine Street, Cincinnati, O. 

18 West i8th Street 

Legislative Library, Victoria, B. C, Canada 

25 Broad Street 

2042 Fifth Avenue 

55 Liberty Street 

Badger Block, Madison, Wis. 

24 East 91st Street 

2a Capuchinas 48, Mexico City, Mex. 

(39) 



40 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Schwab, Gustav H. 
Schwarz, Herbert F. 
Schwarzenbach, Robert J. 
Scott, Frank H. 
Scribner, Sam A. 
Scudder, Edward M. 
Scudder. Townsend 
Scull, Charles O. 
Seabury, William M. 
Seager, Henry Rogers, 
Seaman, Alfred P. W. 
Seaman, Louis L. 
Sears, J. H. 
Seelig, Mr. S. 
Seevers, George W. 
Seggerman, Mrs. Victor 
Seko, Konosuke 
Seligman, E. R. A. 
Seligman, Mrs. Henry 
Seligman, Isaac N. 
Seligman, Jefferson 
Sessoms, E. M. 
Severance, L. H. 
Sexton, Lawrence E. 
Sexton, J. S. 
Shackleton, James H. 
Shaffner, Henry F. 
Shattuck, Henry L. 
Shaw, Albert 
Shaw, William N. 
Shearn, Qarence J. 
Sheehan, William F. 
Sheldon, George R. 
Shelton, Thomas Wall 
Shepard, Charles E. 
Shepherd, W. R. 
Sherman, Gordon E. 
Shientag, Bernard L. 
Shipman, Henry R. 
Shoemaker, Herbert B. 
Shove, Benjamin J. 
Sickles, D E. 
Sidenberg, George M. 
Siegel, Henry 
Silliman, Reuben D. 
Simkhovitch, V. G. 
Simmons, Frank H. 
Simpson, George W. 
Simpson, John W. 



4 East 48th Street 

25s West io8th Street 

F. 472 Broome Street 

Century Company, Union Square 

Broadway and 47th Street 

59 Wall Street 

112 Willow Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Roland Park, Md. 

Fleming Building, Phoenix. Ariz. 

Columbia University 

147 West 87th Street 

247 Fifth Avenue 

35 West 32d Street 

5025 McPherson Avenue, St. Louis, Mo. 

Metropolitan Life Building, Minneapolis, Minn. 

422 West 144th Street 

445 Broome Street 

Columbia University 

30 West 56th Street 

I William Street 

I William Street 

R. F. D. No. I, Caryville, Ra. 

Waldorf-Astoria Hotel 

34 Pine Street 

Hazelhurst, Miss. 

Fidelity Trust Co., Newark, N. J. 

403 High Street, Winston Salem, N. C. 

60 State Street, Boston, Mass. 

13 Astor Place 

165 Broadway 

258 West 94th Street 

14 Wall Street 

24 East 38th Street 

Norfolk, Va. 

614 New York Building, Seattle, Wash. 

468 Riverside Drive 

Ogden Place, Morristown, N. J. 

165 Broadway 

Princeton, N. J. 

31 Nassau Street 

365 Green Street, Syracuse, N. Y. 

23 Fifth Avenue 

45 East 49th Street 

Simpson Crawford Co., 19th St. and 6th Ave. 

609 West 158th Street 

26 Jones Street 

no Centre Street 

90 West Broadway 

62 Cedar Street 

(40) 



No. i] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



41 



Sinclair, A. G. 
Sinclair, Miss Marjorie T. 
Slade, C. C 
Slade, Francis Louis 
Sleicher, Reuben P. 
Sloan, Benson Bennett 
Sloane, William M. 
Smith, Arthur J. 
Smith, C. P. 
Smith, Eugene 
Smith, Frederick M. 
Smith, Harry T. 
Smith, Munroe 
Smith, Nelson 
Smith, R. A. C. 
Smith, S. L.* 
Smyth, Herbert C. 
Snow, Elbridge G. 
Snyder, V. P. 
Sommer, Frank H. 
Sommerich, Edwin 
Sondheim, Phineas 
Soper, Alexander C. 
Soper, Erastus B. 
Sprague, Frank J. 
Spence, Miss Clara B. 
Spencer, A. H. 
Spencer, Charles W. 
Spencer, Henry R. 
Speranza, Gino C. 
Spiegelberg, F. 
St. Goar, F. 
Standish, Myles 
Stangeland, Charles E. 
Stanley, Edward O. 
Starr, William J. 
Starace, Achille 
Stason, Edwin J. 
Staton, Henry 
Stauffen, Ernest, jr. 
Steckler, Edward L. 
Steele, Charles 
Stein, Leo 
Steinan, Edward S. 
Steinkamp, William H. 
Steinman, H. G. 
Sterling, Miss Ada 
Stern, Edgar B. 
Sternbach, Morris 



429 Elgin Avenue, Winnipeg, Canada 

471 Park Avenue 

83 Cedar Street 

18 West 52d Street 

225 Fifth Avenue 

38 Wall Street 

105 East 69th Street 

541 Lexington Avenue 

Burlington Savings Bank, Burlington, Vt. 

39 West 68th Street 

630 S. Crysler Street, Independence, Mo. 

56-58 St. Michael Street, Mobile, Ala. 

169 East 70th Street 

151 West 48th Street 

100 Broadway 

1013 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Mich. 

IS Wall Street 

56 Cedar Street 

31 Nassau Street 

738 Broad Street, Newark, N. J. 

626 Broadway 

49 Wall Street 

Lakewood, N. J. 

Emmetsburg, la. 

165 Broadway 

30 West 55th Street 

90 West Street 

114 Fitz Randolph Road, Princeton, N. J. 

Ohio State University, Columbus, O. 

40 Pine Street 

16 West 76th Street 

35 Wall Street 

20 Nassau Street 

Department of State, Washington, D. C. 

176 Broadway 

Eau Claire, Wis. 

32 Broadway 

Sioux City, la. 

80 Broadway 

119 Fifth Avenue 

61 West 88th Street 

23 Wall Street 

37 West 90th Street 

52 William Street 

34 West 190th Street 

CuUom, 111. 

S8 West 57th Street 

51 15 St. Charles Avenue, New Orleans, La. 

40 Exchange Place 

(41) 



42 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Sterne, L. H. 
Sterrett, J. E. 
Stetson, Francis Lynde 
Stetson, Will H. 
Stettinius, Edward R. 
Steuer, Max D. 
Stevens, F. C. 
Stevens, George W. 
S'.evens, Mrs. Joseph S 
Stevens, Richard 
btevens, T. Jefferson 
Stevenson, Eugene 
Stevenson, L. A. 
Stewart, Bryce M. 
Stewart, John A. 
Stewart, Mrs. Percy H. 
Stewart, William R. 
Stickney, Charles D. 
Stiger, William D. 
Stiger, William E. 
Stillman, Charles 
Stillman, Leland S. 
Stockton, Philip 
Stoddard, John M. 
Stokes, Anson Phelps 
Stokes, J. G. Phelps 
Stone, Harlan F. 
Stone, I. F. 
Storer, Mrs. A. H. 
Straus, Percy S. 
Straus, Simon W. 
Strauss, Albert 
Strauss, Charles 
Strauss, Frederick 
Strohmeyer, George W. 
Strong, Benjamin, jr. 
Stroock, S. M. 
Stubbs, Francis P., jr. 
Sturgis, F. K. 
Styer, David 
Sullivan, J. J. 
Suzzallo, Henry, 
Swan, George B. 
Swan, Mrs. Joseph R. 
Swan, Robert 
Swartwout, Richard H. 
Swayne, Francis B. 
Swayze, Francis J. 
Swetland, Mrs. Horace M. 



2IO West iioth Street 

54 William Street 

15 Broad Street 

43 Cedar Street 

III Broadway 

55 West 88th Street 

309 Southern Building, Washington, D. C. 

71 Broadway 

Kerby Hill, Jericho, L. I. 

I Newark Street, Hoboken, N. J. 

81 Fulton Street 

580 Park Avenue 

Concord, Calif. 

1600 Barclay Street, Vancouver, B. C. 

50 Church Street 

563 West 8th Street, Plainfield, N. J. 

31 Nassau Street 

512 Fifth Avenue 

62 William Street 

138 West 73d Street 

21 West 48th Street 

15 William Street 

17 Court Street, Boston, Mass. 

542 West ii2th Street 

100 William Street 

100 William Street 

49 Wall Street 

100 William Street 

Ridgefield, Conn. 

34th Street and Broadway 

Straus Building, Chicago, 111. 

I William Street 

141 Broadway 

I William Street 

Milwaukee National Bank, Milwaukee, Wis. 

7 Wall Street 

30 Broad Street 

Central Savings Bank Building, Monroe, La. 

17 East 51st Street 

Bordentown Military Institute, Bordentown, N. J. 

Central National Bank, Cleveland, O. 

525 West I20th Street 

loij^ Front Street, Beaver Dam, Wis. 

I Lexington Avenue 

25 Broad Street 

44 Pine Street 

149 Broadway 

765 High Street, Newark, N. J. 

151 Central Park West 

(42) 



No. i] LIST OF MEMBERS 43 

Taber, E. J. L. Elko, Nevada 

Taft, Henry W. 36 West 48th Street 

Taggart, Rush 319 West 75th Street 

Taintor, Charles N. 41 West 76th Street 

Takamine, Jokichi 550 West 173d Street 

Talbert, Joseph T. 55 Wall Street 

Tallmadge, Josiah C. 14 Liberty Street, Catskill, N. Y. 

TaJmage, Mrs. Edward H. - 925 Park Avenue 

Tappan, Mrs. J. B. C. Glen Cove, L. I. 

Taylor, Carl 24 Broad Street 

Taylor, Frederick C. Stamford, Conn. 

Taylor, George 8 West 126th Street 

Taylor, Henry R. 30 Pine Street 

Taylor, Samuel M. 19S Broadway 
Taylor, William H. 1815 Whitehall Building, 17 Battery Place 

Teele, Arthur W. 30 Broad Street 

Teets, Herbert M. 530 Fifth Avenue 

Tefft, Erastus T. 5 Nassau Street 

Tenney, Levi S. 27 William Street 

Terhune, N. ^2 Nassau Street 

Terry, Charles Thaddeus 100 Broadway 

Tesla, Nikola Waldorf-Astoria Hotel 
Teter, Lucius 5637 Woodlawn Avenue, Chicago, 111. 

Thacher, Thomas 62 Cedar Street 

Thaw, A. Blair 135 East 66th Street 

Thitchener, W. H. 30 Broad Street 

Thomas, Albert A. 90 Pearl Street, Middleboro, Mass. 

Thomas, Allen M. 35 West 54th Street 

Thomas, Augustus New Rochelle, N. Y. 

Thomas, John W. 76 William Street 

Thomen, Otto J. 2,2> Pine Street 

Thompson, Mrs. Charles L. 156 Fifth Avenue 

Thompson, Mrs. Frederick F. 283 Madison Avenue 

Thompson, Holland 17 Lexington Avenue 

Thompson, J. David Law Library, Columbia University 

Thompson, William B. 14 Wall Street 

Thorley, Charles 562 Fifth Avenue 

Thorne, Edwin West Islip, L. L 

Thorne, Jonathan 43 Cedar Street 

Thornton, W. D. 42 Broadway 
Thurston, Edward Sampson 1212 S. E. Fifth St., Minneapolis, Minn. 

Titus, Arthur H. 55 Wall Street 

Tobin, R. M. Hibernia Bank, San Francisco, Calif. 

Todd, Albert M. Kalamazoo, Mich. 

Todd, Ambrose G. 51 East s8th Street 

Tokieda, M. 55 Wall Street 

Tomlinson, John C. 35 Wall Street 

Tompkins, Leslie J. Z2 Waverly Place 

Topakyan, H. H. 225 Fifth Avenue 

(43) 



44 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. Ill 



Toulmin, H. A., jr. 

Towne, Henry R. 

Townsend, James M. 

Trube, Miss Jessie Maud ' 

Trull, Mrs. William C. 

Truman, Henry H. 

Trumbull, Frank 

Tucker, H. St. George 

Tuckerman, Alfred 

Tupper, G. W. 

Turnbull, Arthur 

Turner, William L. 

Turnure, George E. 

Turrell, Edgar A. 

Tweed, Miss Katherine W. 

Twitchell, H. K. 

Tyler, William S. 

Ullman, Joseph 

Underbill, Francis Jay 

Urban, George, jr. 

Van Amringe, Guy 

Van Beuren, F. T 

Van Beuren, Michael M. 

Van Cortlandt, R. B. 

Vanden Berg, F. 

Vanderlip, Frank A. 

Van Ingen, Philip 

Van Vorst, Mrs. Frederick B 

Van Wagenen, Bleecker 

Vernier, Chester G. 

Ver Planck, William Gordon 

Vezin, Charles 

Victor, Royall 

Villard, Mrs. Henry 

Villard, Oswald Garrison 

Vitale, Ferruccio 

von Mayhoff, Mrs. Carl 

Voorhees, John H 

Voorhees, Stephen H. 

Voorhees W. P. 

Wacker, Charles H. 

Wade, G. K. B. 

Wade, William O. 

Wagner, Edward E 

Walbridge, H. D. 

Walker, Roberts 

Walker, William Hall 

Wallace, James U. 

Walter, W. J. 



Schwind Building, Dayton, O. 

121 Madison Avenue 

165 Broadway 

Bella Sylva," Hastings-on-Hudson, N. Y. 

20 Fifth Avenue 

56 Highland Avenue, Orange, N. J. 

71 Broadway 

Lexington, Va. 

University Club 

74 Pleasant Street, Brookline. Mass. 

38 Wall Street 

84 Cotton Exchange Building 

64 Wall Street 

76 William Street 

12 East 36th Street 

270 Broadway 

30 Church Street 
160 Broadway 

2131 Broadway 
Pine Ridge, Buffalo, N. Y. 

31 Nassau Street 
65 Fifth Avenue 

7 Wall Street 

30 Pine Street 

2,2 Nassau Street 

55 Wall Street 

125 East 71st Street 

II Euclid Avenue, Hackensack, N. J. 

443 Fourth Avenue 

University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. 

149 Broadway 

409 Palisade Avenue, Yonkers, N. Y. 

ID West 6ist Street 

14s West 58th Street 

20 Vesey Street 

1 133 Broadway 

59 East 34th Street 

Sioux Falls, So. Dak. 

68 William Street 

35 Union Street, New Brunswick, N. J. 

134 La Salle Street, Chicago, III. 

155 East 72d Street 

1241 First National Bank Building, Chicago, III. 

416 Western National Bank Building, Mitchell, S. D. 

7 Wall Street 

115 P roadway 

23 West S4th Street 

54 Wall Street 

52 Broadway 

(44) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



45 



Warburg, Felix M. 
Warburg, Paul M. 
Ward, Owen 
Wardrop, Robert 
Wardwell, Allen 
Warfield, F. P. 
Warren, Charles H. 
Warren, Lloyd 
Warren, Mrs. Schuyler N. 



52 William Street 

52 William Street 

208 Fifth Avenue 

People's National Bank, Pittsburgh, Pa. 

15 Broad Street 

2 Rector Street 

34 Nassau Street 

3 East 33d Street 

311 Lexington Avenue 



Washington, William De Hertburn 

Waterbury, John L 

Watson, C. W. 

Watson, Frank D. 

Watson. John J., jr. 

Webb, George T. 

Webb, Silas D. 

Weber, A. F. 

Webster, Frank G. 

Weeks, W. Holden 

Weil, Edw^ard A. 

Weinstein, Edward M. 

Weitling, William W. 

Welch, S. C. 

Welling, Richard 

Welwood, John C. 

Westcott, Clarence L. 

Westinghouse, George 

Weyl, Walter E. 

Wheat, Alfred A. 

Wheeler, Everett P. 

Whinery, C. C. 

Whitaker, Edward G. 

White, Andrew D. 

White, Archibald S. 

White, Horace 

White, John B. 

White, Leonard D. 

White, Miss Mary Langdon 

Whitin, E. Stagg 

Whitin, Frederick H. 

Whitlock, Victor E. 

Whitman, Malcolm D. 

Whitridge, F. W. 

Whitten, Robert H. 

Wiborg, F. B. 

Wickes, Edward A. 

Wier, Frederick N. 

Wilcox, Ansley 

Wilcox, Delos F. 



267 Fifth Avenue 
14 Wall Street 
500 Madison Avenue 
Hartley Hall, Columbia University 
390 West End Avenue 
Ellendale, N. Dak. 
32 Burling Slip 
464 Elm Street, Richmond Hill, N. Y. 
P. O. Box 7, Boston, Mass. 
789 Madison Avenue 
70 Gold Street 
Public Bank, Delancy & Ludlow Streets 
College Point, N. Y. 
Waynesville, N. C. 
2 Wall Street 
320 Central Park West 
100 Broadway 
Pittsburgh, Pa. 
175 Second Avenue 
32 Nassau Street 
735 Park Avenue 
35 West 32d Street 
45 Broadway 
Ithaca, N. Y. 
Fourth & Plum Streets, Cincinnati, O. 
18 West 69th Street 
Long Building, Kansas City, Mo. 
52 Broadway 
105 East 22d Street 
Columbia University 
501 West 113th Street 
32 Nassau Street 
115 East 60th Street 
59 Wall Street 
684 East 2ist Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
Cincinnati, O. 
15 Broad Street 
42 Eleventh Street, Lowell, Mass. 
684 ElUcott Square, Buffalo, N. Y. 
75 Sixth Street, Elmhurst, N. Y. 
(45) 



46 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



[Vol. hi 



Willcox, W. F. 
Willcox, W. R. 
Wild, Frank G. 
Wilkes, Miss Grace 
Willard, Daniel 
Willard, Eugene S. 
Willett, George F. 
Williams, Alexander S. 

Astoria Veneer 
Williams, Arthur 
Williams, Clark 
Williams, Edward T. 
Williams, Ephraim 
Williams, Frank B. 
Williams, George C. F. 
Williams, Harrison 
Williams, Henry D. 
Williams, John Skelton * 
Williams, P. L. 
Williams, Richard H. 
Williams, Stephen G. 
Williams, T. E. 
Williams, Timothy S. 
Williams, Waldron 
Williamson, Charles C. 
Willoughby, W. F. 
Willson, Frederick 
Wilson, Mrs. J. Augustine 
Wilson, Henry F., jr. 
Wilson, Hugh M. 
Wilson, James Harrison 
Wilson, Warren H. 
Wing, Daniel G. 
Wing, Thomas E. 
Winthrop, Bronson 
Witherbee, F. S. 
Witizman, John R. 
Wolf, W. Irving 
Wolfe, S. Herbert 
Wolff, Emil 
Wolff, Herbert Alfred 
Wolff, Mrs. Lewis S. 
Wood, Mrs. Joseph S. i 

Wood, L. Hollingsworth 
Wood, Willis D. 
Woodbury, Theodore C. 
Woodin, C. R. 
Woodin, W. H. 
Woods, Frank H. 



College of Arts and Sciences, Ithaca, N. Y. 

165 Broadway 

2yy Broadway 

16 Washington Square 

Belvedere Hotel, Baltimore, Md 

45 Pine Street 

248 Summer Street, Boston, Mass. 

Mills & Dock Co., Long Island City, N. Y. 

55 Duane Street 

293 Madison Avenue 

54 William Street 

12 West 44th Street 

55 West 44th Street 

990 Prospect Avenue, Hartford, Conn. 

60 Broadway 

141 West I22d Street 

801 East Main Street, Richmond, Va. 

177 13th East Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 

I Broadway 

30 Broad Street 

Aurora, Neb. 

Huntington, L. I. 

220 Eleventh Avenue 

403 West 115th Street 

Princeton University, Princeton, N. J. 

P. O. Box 295, Reading, Pa. 

618 West 138th Street 

7 Wall Street 

118 West 57th Street 

1305 Rodney Street, Wilmington, Del. 

245 Arlington Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

First National Bank, Boston, Mass. 

2,7 Wall Street 

23 East 33d Street 

4 Fifth Avenue 

Conrad, la. 

511 East 72d Street 

1038 Fifth Avenue 

171 West 71st Street 

250 West 82d Street 

12 East 70th Street 

35 South Second Avenue, Mt. Vernon, N. Y. 

2 Wall Street 

7 Wall Street 

25 Broad Street 

40 East 64th Street 

165 Broadway 

1220 South 20th Street, Lincoln, Neb. 

(46) 



No. I] 



LIST OF MEMBERS 



47 



Woods, William W. 
Woodward, S. W. 
Woolley, Edwin C. 
Woolverton, W. H. 
Worden, Charles H. 
Wright, George M. 
Wright, H. J. 
Wright, H.M. 215 U.S. 
Wright, Mrs. James A. 
Wyckoff, William F. 
Wyper, James 
Young, Charles W. 
Young, Eugene N. L. 
Younker, Herman 
Zabriskie, Mrs. C. B. 
Zachry, J. Greer 
Zimmerman, Miss R. E. 



318 Normandie Avenue, Los Angeles, Calif. 

2015 Wyoming Avenue, Washington, D. C. 

1716 Hoyt Street, Madison, Wis. 

180 West 59th Street 

625 West Wayne Street, Ft. Wayne, Ind. 

280 Broadway 

7 Dey Street 

Court House & P. O. Building, San Francisco, Calif. 

133 West nth Street 

215 Montague Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

2717 Claremont Boulevard, Berkeley, Calif. 

40 Wall Street 

9 Jackson Avenue, Long Island City, L. L 

220 Fifth Avenue 

119 East 19th Street 

68 East 83d Street 

358 Fifth Avenue 



SUBSCRIBING MEMBERS 



Austin College Library 

Berkshire Athenaeum 

Biddle Law Library University 

Boston Public Library 

Carnegie Library 

Chicago Law Institute 

City Library Association 

City Library 

Clark University Library 

Cleveland Law Library Association 

Cleveland Public Library 

Colorado State Library 

Cornell University Library 

John Crerar Library 

Denver Public Library 

Detroit Public Library 

Emeline Fairbanks Memorial Library 

Enoch Pratt Free Library 

First National Bank 

Free Public Library 

Free Public Library of Newark 

Free Public Library 

Hoboken Free Public Library 

Interstate Commerce Commission 

Lane Free Library 

Library Association 

Library of the Court of Appeals 

(47) 



Austin College, Sherman, Tex. 

Pittsfield, Mass. 

of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Copley Square, Boston, Mass. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

1025 County Building, Chicago, 111. 

Springfield, Mass. 

Manchester, N. H. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Cleveland, O. 

Cleveland, O. 

Denver, Colo. 

Ithaca, N. Y. 

Chicago, 111. 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Terre Haute, Ind. 

Baltimore, Md. 

Hamilton, O. 

Jersey City, N. J. 

Newark, N. J. 

Tulare, Cal. 

Hoboken, N. J. 

Washington, D. C. 

Hamilton. O. 

Portland, Ore. 

Syracuse, N. Y. 



48 



YEAR BOOK OF THE ACADEMY 



Lincoln City Library 
Lobdell, E. L., & Co. 
Los Angeles Public Library 
Massachusetts State Library 
Meadville Theological School Library 
Medford Public Library 
Michigan State Library 
Minnesota State Reformatory Library 
New York Public Library 
Northwestern Law School 
Patterson Library 
Public Library 
Rhode Island State Library 
San Francisco Law Library 
Social Law Library 
St. Joseph Free Public Library 
St. Louis Public Library 
St. Paul Public Library 
University of Illinois Library 
Vermont State Library 
Washington, Public Library 
Washington State College 
Wellesley College Library 
Wilmington Institute Free Library 
Women's Municipal League 
Young Men's Christian Association Library 

(48) 



Lincoln, Neb. 

The Rookery, Chicago, 111. 

Los Angeles, Calif. 

Boston, Mass. 

Meadville, Pa. 

Medford, Mass. 

Lansing, Mich. 

St. Cloud, Minn. 

476 Fifth Avenue 

Lake & Dearborn Streets, Chicago, 111. 

Westfield, N. Y. 

Cincinnati, O. 

Providence, R. I. 

805 Grant Building, San Francisco, Calif. 

Boston, Mass. 

St. Joseph, Mo. 

St. Louis, Mo. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

University Station, Urbana, 111. 

Montpelier, Vt. 

Washington, D. C. 

Pullman, Wash. 

Wellesley, Mass. 

Wilmington, Del. 

46 East 29th Street 

215 West 23d Street 



JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITU- 
TIONAL PROVISIONS^ 

FRANK J. GOODNOW 
Professor of Administrative Law, Columbia University 

WHEN the constitution of the United States was adopted 
at the end of the eighteenth century, the conditions 
to which it was intended to apply were marked 
by three distinguishing characteristics. The first was geo- 
graphical in its nature ; the second was economic ; the third 
intellectual. In the first place, the United States for which the 
constitution was framed, consisted of a series of communities, 
lying along the Atlantic seaboard of North America, largely 
engaged in agricultural pursuits and occupying sparsely popu- 
lated districts which as compared with their population were 
richly endowed with natural resources. These communities 
were in the main connected one with another only by the sea 
and by the rivers and estuaries which in many instances pene- 
trated far into the interior. Their social conditions were as di- 
verse as their geographical condition was isolated. In some 
slave labor, in others free labor was the rule. In some one 
racial element or one religious confession was most pronounced ; 
in others another. Their comparative geographical isolation 
and their difference in economic and social conditions naturally 
had the effect of causing the states, as these communities had 
come to be called, to regard the maintenance of a large degree 
of local independence as of the greatest importance. 

In the second place, the economic conditions of the time 
were comparatively simple. Even the countries of Western 
Europe which were most advanced from an industrial point of 
view were only just beginning to make use of the factory sys- 
tem in their industrial organization. The hand tool had not as 
yet generally given place to steam-driven machinery. The 

'Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, Oct. 26, 1912. 

(49) 



2 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

industrial worker in most instances still followed his livelihood 
within the narrow confines of his own dwelling and regulated 
the hours of his labor by his desires or necessities. The steam 
locomotive was just about taking shape in the imaginative minds 
of such men as George Stephenson. The only means of tele- 
graphing was to be found in the beacon, the heliograph and the 
semaphore. No human being had even dreamed of the tele- 
phone. Such slight change in European industrial conditions 
as was due to power machinery and the building of factories 
had not taken place in North America, which as has been said 
was predominantly agricultural in character. 

Finally, the philosophy of the time was based upon the con- 
ception that society was static rather than dynamic or progres- 
sive in character. Belief in verities eternal and absolute under 
all conditions was almost universal among educated men. 
Nowhere was this confidence in absolute and eternal truth more 
marked than in the domain of political thought. The various 
Utopias which had been outlined by political theorists and 
philosophical dreamers had held before the mind of man a goal 
which he should strive to attain. An ideal state was pictured 
in which, if it were once reached, humanity would cease from 
striving and finally at rest would contemplate with complacency 
the hardships of the past and anticipate with satisfaction the 
joys of the future. It is of course true that political philoso- 
phers had not at the end of the eighteenth century, any more 
than at any other time in the history of man, reached a com- 
plete agreement as to the concrete measures whose adoption 
was necessary for the realization of the perfect state of which 
all had their visions. It is also true that the concrete measures 
which were recommended were frequently, if not always, evi- 
dently devised in view of the peculiar evils which each such 
prophet sought to remedy. At the same time while the politi- 
cal doctors disagreed somewhat as to the proper medicine, they 
all believed that some medicine would be permanently effica- 
cious, and few, if any, of them imagined that the patient would 
by mere development so change as to make changes of treat- 
ment necessary. The proper treatment once discovered was to 
be continued for all time and would be followed by the desired 

results. 

(50) 



No. 2] INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION 3 

Under the influence of this static conception of society the 
political philosophers and lawgivers of the end of the eighteenth 
century had accepted as a fundamental and everlasting political 
theory the idea that the state was Uased upon a compact entered 
into between governors and governed. The governed — i. e., 
the mass of mankind — were considered to have reserved at the 
time of making this compact, certain rights which were often 
spoken of as natural rights and of which they might not be de- 
prived. This doctrine of natural rights had for its corollary the 
recognition of a wide sphere of individual liberty which should 
be unregulated by government action. This corollary ultimately 
came to be known as the principle of laissez faire. 

It was in these conditions and Under the influence of these 
ideas that the constitution of the United States was adopted. 
This instrument was framed for communities geographically iso- 
lated, socially diverse, living a mo^t simple life and in a com- 
paratively low stage of economical development. It was in- 
tended to realize through actual application the idea of a social 
compact, the theory of natural rights and the laissez-faire 
policy. It was based finally upon the fundamental proposition 
that man could by searching find out and apply absolute and 
eternal political truth. 

The geographical isolation and social diversity of the states 
led to the laying of great emphasis in the constitution of the 
United States upon the necessity of preserving for all time the 
same degree of state sovereignty and independence as was 
recognized to exist in the latter part of the eighteenth century. 
Each state was secured beyond the possibility of change equal 
representation in the Senate while, its consent was made neces- 
sary to its division or its union with other states. No serious 
attempt was made to secure uniformity of law, and subject to 
the necessity of maintaining a republican form of government, 
each state was left to arrange its internal organization as it saw 
fit. Indeed, important matters affecting all the states were left 
to the determination of each state, such as suffrage and the method 
of choosing presidential electors. 

The social-compact, natural-rights and laissez-faire theories 
found their expression in the enumeration of governmental 

(51) 



4 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

powers, the reservation to the people of all powers not granted 
to the government, certain express denials of powers of govern- 
ment action and the formulation of a series of individual rights 
which the government was not permitted to infringe. 

Finally, the confidence of the fathers in the existence of 
eternal political verities and the possibility that fallible humanity 
might ascertain and formulate them is seen in the difficulty 
if not impossibility of amending the constitution which resulted 
from the processes of amendment provided. For as Dicey says : 

The sovereign of the United States has been roused to serious action 
but once during the course of ninety years. It needed the thunder of 
the civil war to break his repose and it may be doubted whether any- 
thing short of impending revolution will ever again rouse him into ac- 
tivity. 

If we compare with the conditions which existed at the time 
the constitution was adopted those in which we are now living, 
what a contrast at once presents itself ! The industrial revolu- 
tion by which the last century and a half of Western European 
development has been characterized has changed the face of 
most civilized countries. Power machinery with its attendant 
factory system has so modified productive processes that in 
almost all highly developed countries classes of industrial 
workers have arisen which in numbers and in minute differentia- 
tion of occupation surpass anything the world's history has 
hitherto exhibited. Improved methods of transportation have 
so facilitated intercourse and so enlarged the sphere of man's 
activity that what were once regarded as insurmountable ob- 
stacles to communication are no longer so considered, and 
what once seemed to be natural political boundaries have lost 
their significance. 

In other words, classes have developed whose relations can- 
not be defined in accordance with the rubrics of a once almost 
universally accepted legal lore and centralization is necessary if 
the political system is to be in accord with recognized economic 
facts. Just as once the privilege of the baron fell before 
the rights of the merchant, and local law gave way to national 
law, so at the present time the rights of labor are being em- 

(52) 



No. 2] INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION 5 

phasized at the expense of the employer and a political organi- 
zation based on more or less local isolation is being forced 
to succumb to the needs of an economic system founded upon 
more general intercommunication. 

This development has not failed to exercise an effect on the 
United States. The improvement in the means of transporta- 
tion has, for example, been most marked on this side of the 
water. The digging of waterways, the building of railways, 
and the spread of the telegraph and telephone have caused the 
geographical isolation of the once separated states to disappear. 
The development of American industry and commerce, not- 
withstanding the acquisition of the fertile fields of the West 
and the attendant agricultural development, has caused the 
former overwhelmingly predominant rural character of the 
population to disappear. The gradual spread of the English 
language has brought about an almost complete unity of speech 
while the greatly diminished influence of religious differences 
taken together with the complete separation of church and state 
has prevented the centrifugal force of creeds from making 
itself felt. 

Finally it is to be noticed that the intellectual attitude of what 
are usually considered the more intelligent classes is quite dif- 
ferent from that which was noticeable in the latter part of the 
eighteenth century. The formulation of the evolutionary theory 
of development in the world of science has not failed to have its 
influence on political thought. Students of politics are coming 
more and more to the conviction that a static society is impos- 
sible and that absolute political theories are incapable of appli- 
cation in the changing conditions which have become so notice- 
able since scientific methods have been applied to the conduct 
of life. More and more political thinkers and social students 
are recognizing that a policy of intelligent opportunism is the 
policy most likely to be followed by desirable results and that 
adherence to general theories which are to be applied at all 
times and under all conditions is productive of harm rather than 
good. 

This common attitude of skepticism with regard to the de- 
sirability of attempting to postulate fundamental political prin- 

. (53) 

1 * 



6 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

ciples of universal application has naturally caused questions to 
be raised as to the applicability under present conditions of the 
two great theories so commonly accepted at the end of the 
eighteenth century, viz., the theories of the social compact and 
of natural rights. Furthermore, the discovery that through the 
application of scientific methods man has a much greater influ- 
ence over his environment than was formerly regarded as pos- 
sible has opened the way to so many apparently effective 
methods of governmental regulation that a serious blow has 
been dealt to the laissez-faire theory. 

The question which has been chosen for discussion this morn- 
ing is: Can a practically unamendable constitution, adopted in 
the conditions and under the influences of the political thought 
prevailing at the end of the eighteenth century, be adapted by 
judicial interpretation to the needs and thought of the twentieth 
century without causing us to lose the advantages which are 
commonly regarded as attached to a written constitution? Be- 
fore the attempt is made to answer this question attention must 
be called to two things. 

In the first place, it is now an accepted doctrine of American 
constitutional law that it is both the right and the duty of the 
courts to declare in cases which come before them in the ordi- 
nary exercise of their jurisdiction that any act of the legislature 
is unconstitutional which clearly violates a provision of the con- 
stitution. It would be unprofitable for us to enter upon the 
discussion of the question which has recently been made the 
subject of considerable debate, whether the courts in exercising 
this power have been guilty or not of usurpation. However 
this may be, it is difficult to imagine that the federal courts at 
this day will relinquish the exercise of a power whose existence 
has been recognized so long, except as the result of some sort 
of personal pressure brought to bear upon the judges which will 
diminish greatly the independence they now enjoy. It is com- 
monly believed that the judges of the United States courts may 
constitutionally be removed only through the process of im- 
peachment, which as provided for in the constitution is not a 
method of removal adapted for use in influencing judicial de- 
cisions on constitutional questions. The constitution, however, 

(54) 



No. 2] INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION y 

has no word to say as to the impeachment of judges as judges. 
It is only as civil officers of the United States that they have 
been made subject to this process of removal from office. The 
constitution does, however, contain a specific and express pro- 
vision with regard to the tenure of judges. It says that they 
shall hold their office during good behavior. It does not define 
good behavior nor does it provide a method, outside of the 
method of impeachment applicable to all civil officers, for de- 
termining when a judge is guilty of misbehavior. It has been 
claimed more than once in Congress that it is within the power 
of the legislative authority of the United States by law to define 
what is misbehavior and to provide a method by which misbe- 
havior may be ascertained which is less cumbersome than the 
present method of impeachment. Until such action is taken, it 
is naturally impossible to say what would be the decision of the 
Suprem.e Court as to its propriety. If, however, such action 
were regarded as constitutional it would be possible for Con- 
gress through the exercise of a power of removal similar to that 
now possessed by the legislature of Massachusetts over the 
judges of that state to bring a pressure to bear upon the judges 
of the federal courts which would have an important influence 
on the judicial interpretation of the constitution. 

In the second place, it is to be noted that the doctrines of the 
social compact and of natural rights while regarded as truths 
were not actually made a part of our constitutional law except 
in so far as specific rights conceived of as natural rights were 
incorporated into the constitution and were thus accorded 
judicial protection. At the same time the tendency of our 
courts has been to read into such general provisions as that 
preventing the government from depriving a person of life, 
liberty, or property without due process of law, quite a number 
of natural-rights ideas, and to endeavor, in their efforts to deny 
the right of the government to exercise particular powers, to 
obtain aid and comfort from the theory of laissez faire. A 
good example of such action is to be found in an opinion 
of the supreme court of Missouri which said in declaring 
unconstitutional a law levying a progressive inheritance tax to 
provide scholarships for indigent students at the state university : 

(55) 



8 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

Paternalism, whether state or federal, as the derivation of the term 
implies , is an assumption by the government of a quasi-fatherly relation 
to the citizen and his family, involving excessive governmental regula- 
tion of the private affairs and business methods and interests of the 
people, upon the theory that the people are incapable of managing their 
own affairs, and is pernicious in its tendencies. In a word, it min- 
imizes the citizen and maximizes the government. Our federal and 
state governments are founded upon a principle wholly antagonistic to 
such a doctrine. Our fathers believed the people of these free and in- 
dependent states were capable of self-government ; a system in which 
the people are the sovereigns and the government their creature to carry 
out their commands. Such a government is founded on the willingness 
and right of the people to take care of their own affairs and an indis- 
position to look to the government for everything. The citizen is the 
unit. It is his province to support the government and not the gov- 
ernment's to support him. Under self-government we have advanced 
in all the elements of a great people more rapidly than any nation that 
has ever existed upon the earth, and there is greater need now than ever 
before in our history of adhering to it. Paternalism is a plant which 
should receive no nourishment upon the soil of Missouri. 

In a way, therefore, it may be said that the political thought 
prevalent at the end of the eighteenth century has been read 
into our constitution by the courts. But unless we consider the 
doctrine of stare decisis just as controlling in constitutional 
as in other cases it may not be said of our constitutions and 
particularly of the United States constitution that they adopted 
as a permanent guide for future action any of the theories 
which have been mentioned. It is only because of judicial 
interpretation that they have legal force. By a further process 
of judicial interpretation they may lose their authority. 

So far as concerns the effect of the laissez-faire theory 
on the judicial interpretation of the constitution, even the ap- 
plication of the doctrine of stare decisis to constitutional cases 
will not interfere with a considerable enlargement of the powers 
of the federal government. In a number of instances, among 
which the attempted exercise of the power to regulate com- 
merce is perhaps the most marked, the federal courts through 
the denial of the propriety of the exercise of state powers laid 
the basis for the exercise of federal power. However they 

(S6) 



No. 2] INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION 9 

may have been influenced in their decisions by the laissez-faire 
theory, their actual decisions recognized the existence of federal 
power. For state power was denied because the power at- 
tempted to be exercised had been conferred by the constitution 
upon the federal government. When in the course of our 
economic development it came to be believed that Congress 
should take positive action, the decisions denying state power 
were thus at the same time precedents in favor of the propriety 
of federal action. On the other hand, not all the decisions 
recognizing that state action was proper may be regarded 
as precedents in favor of the proposition that Congress is with- 
out jurisdiction. For through the adoption of the rule that 
state action is in many cases proper only because the federal 
government has not acted, the question as to the propriety 
of federal action is left open for determination, to be influenced 
if not controlled by the conditions existing at the time the 
determination is made. 

In the discussion of the possibility by judicial interpretation 
of adapting the constitution to changing economic and social 
needs we must then remember : first, that it has not been as 
yet determined how much pressure may constitutionally be 
brought by Congress upon the federal judiciary to interpret 
the constitution in the way desired by Congress; and second, 
that our constitution has been made by past judicial interpreta- 
tion to take on a meaning which is not necessarily the only 
meaning which may be given to it. Finally, attention should 
be called to the fact that the present interpretation which is 
popularly given to the constitution is in many cases a political 
rather than a judicial interpretation. Political parties as well 
as courts have been influenced by the political and economic 
theories of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. 
Under their influence Congress has not even considered the 
question whether it may exercise powers which a careful study 
of the constitution might reveal that Congress possessed. An 
historical tradition with regard to the constitution has sprung 
up which finds its basis in political expediency rather than in 
constitutional power. For example. Congress has only just 
begun to exercise its power to regulate commerce among the 

(57) 



lO EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

several states. What the limits of that power are no one can 
with safety say, but that they transcend those assigned to that 
power by the accepted political interpretation would be denied 
by few who have made a careful study of the constitution 
itself. Now this political interpretation of the constitution may 
easily change. It is not in any way influenced by the doctrine 
of stare decisis. For Congress is not bound by the decisions 
of its predecessors even on constitutional questions. 

If, however, we leave out of consideration the possibility that 
Congress may diminish the independence of the federal judi- 
ciary, if we put out of our minds the expectation that the 
courts will adopt any new method of constitutional interpreta- 
tion, and if we confine ourselves to the consideration of the 
present judicial interpretation of the constitution, how shall we 
answer the question? In other words, are the courts through 
their powers of interpretation at the present time adapting the 
constitution to changing economic and social conditions? 

To answer this question adequately would of necessity in- 
volve an exhaustive examination of almost our entire constitu- 
tional law from the point of view of its historical development. 
Such an examination would, however, be both impossible and 
out of place on this occasion. Resort to some other less thor- 
ough and less satisfactory method is thus unavoidable. It 
might be suggested that citations from opinions might be made 
which would show the attitude of the Supreme Court with 
regard to the constitution. But any citations which might be 
made as indicative of the attitude of the court, in addition to 
lacking the authority of judicial decision, might be met by other 
citations taking the opposite point of view. For in the century 
and a quarter of its history the Supreme Court has been subject 
to a variety of influences and has inevitably expressed conflict- 
ing opinions. 

The only method which is applicable on this occasion would 
seem to be to consider certain important lines of decisions in 
the hope of finding from a consideration of the law developed 
by them an answer to the question which has been propounded. 

Let us take in the first place the decisions which have dealt 
with the powers of the federal government and particularly 

'58) 



No. 2] INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION \ i 

those having to do with navigation and commerce. The con- 
stitution does not treat of navigation apart from commerce 
except in so far as it confers admiralty and maritime jurisdic- 
tion upon the federal courts. In the early days when local 
differentiation made state independence more important than at 
present — for state lines now bear little relation to our economic 
system — the court was inclined to distinguish intrastate from 
interstate navigation, and to recognize a very narrow admiralty 
jurisdiction based upon British precedents. At the present 
time, however, the distinction between a navigation subject to 
state and one subject to federal regulation has practically ceased 
to exist, and an admiralty jurisdiction suited to the geographi- 
cal conditions of the North American continent has been 
developed out of that which originated in such different con- 
ditions as were presented by Great Britain. 

The way in which this result was reached is interesting as 
evidencing the methods of judicial interpretation through whose 
application the constitution has in this particular been adapted 
to new social and economic conditions. Originally the Supreme 
Court was of the opinion that the admiralty and maritime juris- 
diction intended to be conferred upon the federal courts was 
geographically limited to waters affected by the ebb and flow 
of the tide. The case which laid down this rule was decided 
at a time when navigation on the Great Lakes and western 
rivers had not developed to an important extent. Later on 
Congress by statute extended the jurisdiction to the Great 
Lakes and the Supreme Court declared the statute constitu- 
tional. Still later the Supreme Court without any action by 
Congress extended the admiralty jurisdiction to all the import- 
ant western rivers and finally based on the admiralty clause, 
which merely gives power to the courts, the power of Congress 
to regulate the operations of all vessels on navigable waters 
regardless of the fact that they may not be engaged in com- 
merce. 

Somewhat similar has been the judicial interpretation of the 
constitutional power of Congress to regulate commerce on land. 
While the Supreme Court has based the power of Congress to 
regulate navigation in large degree on a clause in the constitu- 

(59) 



12 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

tion which merely gave the courts the power to fix the sub- 
stantive law of admiralty, in the case of commerce by land the 
Supreme Court has based the power of Congress to regulate 
part at any rate of the substantive law of master and servant 
upon the power given in the constitution to Congress to regu- 
late commerce among the several states. The safety-appliance 
and the employer's-liability cases have thus recognized that 
Congress in cases involving interstate commerce may modify 
the assumption-of-risk and the contributory-negligence doc- 
trines of the common law. 

Another instance of the adaptation by judicial interpretation 
of the constitution to changing social and economic conditions 
is to be seen in the lottery and pure-food-law cases which have 
recognized that Congress through the exercise of its commerce 
power may take the privilege of engaging in interstate com- 
merce from articles, commerce in which is in the opinion of 
Congress either productive of immorality or liable to endanger 
the public health. This result has been reached although it is 
recognized that Congress is not by the constitution the guardian 
of either the public morals or the public health. 

The Supreme Court has in the second place expressed its 
belief that such general provisions of the constitution as that 
contained in the fourteenth amendment prohibiting a state 
from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without 
due process of law, are to be interpreted in view of local condi- 
tions. Thus it has been held that, in the conditions existing in 
New England where manufacturing is of great importance, the 
power of eminent domain may be used in order to take prop- 
erty for the purposes of a dam used by a private manufacturing 
company. In the mountainous regions of the West it has been 
held proper to make use of the same power to take property 
for the purposes of an aerial railway used only by a private 
mining company. Finally, in the arid regions of the Pacific 
States it is regarded as constitutional to make use of both the 
taxing power and the power of eminent domain to further the 
irrigation of privately owned lands. 

Indeed it may be said in a general way that the judicial 
interpretation which has already been given to the constitution 

(60) 



No. 2] INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION 13 

has shown itself capable of adapting that instrument to most of 
the varied geographical conditions which exist in a continent 
as diversified as is North America and to permit of the most 
advantageous development of its economic resources. 

It is true that as yet the Supreme Court has not through the 
judicial interpretation of the constitution adapted it so fully to 
the changes in economic and social conditions which have been 
due to the industrial revolution of the last one hundred and 
fifty years. American courts rather generally, and the Supreme 
Court to a certain but after all on the whole rather small exLent, 
have not been able to divest themselves of the idea that legal 
liberty is the only liberty which is protected by the constitution 
and have sometimes forgotten that legal liberty in the absence 
of economic liberty is a shadow without substance, under which 
there is little if any protection from the burning heat of eco- 
nomic struggle. 

A case in Pennsylvania has thus laid down the proposition 
that an employer is denied his constitutional right to the pursuit 
of happiness by a law which requires him to pay his employes 
once in two weeks. In the volume of the digest in which this 
case is mentioned the very next case referred is to the effect that 
one is not denied the right to the pursuit of happiness by a law 
forbidding the smoking of opium. The immediate juxtaposi- 
tion of these two cases is interesting as emphasizing the tendency 
of American courts to recognize that while individual rights are 
not violated by laws regulating conduct regarded as inconsistent 
with prevailing ethical views, they are infringed by any attempt 
to protect the classes weaker in economic power by diminishing 
their sphere of legal liberty. 

It must be admitted, however, that the Supreme Court has 
not as yet, largely because of a defect in our appellate pro- 
cedure, been in a position to express itself upon some of the 
most important phases of the liberty guaranteed to the indi- 
vidual by the constitution. But in most of the cases which have 
come before it where it was possible to prove that legal liberty 
must be curtailed in the interest of health and safety its de- 
cisions have recognized that under the economic conditions in 
which we live the liberty which we may have is much less than 

(61) 



J 4 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

would have been recognized a century ago as our due. It may- 
be added also that in a number of cases the Supreme Court has 
expressed itself in such a way as to show clearly that it is aware 
that the economic liberty of vast classes of persons at the present 
time has been so curtailed that the sphere of legal liberty for 
which the advocates of a laissez-faire policy contend must also 
be seriously curtailed if we are to protect the economically 
weak from their own really involuntary acts. Thus in the case 
of sailors the court has held constitutional an act of Congress 
prohibiting under a penalty any payment of wages in advance, 
and in the case of miners has upheld state statutes which have 
regulated the method of paying employes by providing for the 
cashing of coal orders when presented to their employers, and 
for the weighing of coal without screening where miners are 
paid by the weight of coal. In one of these cases the court re- 
fers to the necessity of protecting the sailor against his own im- 
providence, and in another cites with apparent approval from 
the decision of the state court appealed from where it is said : 

The legislature evidently deemed the laborer at some disadvantage 
under existing laws and customs, and by this act undertook to amelio- 
rate his condition in some measure by enabling him or his bona fide 
transferee, at his election and at a proper time to demand and receive 
his unpaid wages in money rather than in something less valuable. Its 
tendency, though slight it may be, is to place the employer and 
employe on equal ground, and, so far as it accomplishes that end, is 
commendable. 

It is, of course, true that a very few of the decisions of the 
Supreme Court have been a grevious disappointment to some of 
the most ardent advocates of social reform, but it is to be 
remembered that these decisions were usually made by a divided 
court, that the personnel of the court is seldom the same for a 
very long period, that its members are appointed by an officer 
who is being brought day by day closer to the people and 
finally, that the Supreme Court has been known to reverse 
its opinions, and is not impervious to criticisms and to public 
demands. 

There would seem therefore to be really no serious danger 

(62) 



No. 2] INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION 15 

that judicial interpretation as seen in the long series of decisions- 
of the Supreme Court is unable to adapt our practically un- 
amendable constitution to changing economic and social condi- 
tions. If this may not be said of all the state courts our remedy 
is close at hand and may be applied without abandoning the 
traditions of the past. 

If state courts are, because of their adherence to precedent, 
unable or unwilling to adapt the provisions of state constitu- 
tions to changes in economic conditions, we may amend the 
state constitutions. Whether that is done by the ordinary 
methods of constitutional amendment or by the method which 
has come to be spoken of as " the recall of judicial decisions " 
is quite immaterial from the viewpoint of the question under 
consideration. If we regard the " recall of judicial decisions " 
with suspicion and at the same time consider the present method 
of constitutional amendment as too difficult, too slow, or too 
cumbersome, it is a comparatively easy matter to adopt an 
easier, quicker, and more simple method. The various methods 
of amendment provided by different state constitutions offer 
us a choice of methods wide enough to suit almost any taste. 

If when our state constitutions are so amended as to make it 
possible for the state courts to bring their decisions into accord 
with existing economic conditions, those courts still persist 
in rendering decisions with regard to the constitutionality of 
state laws from the viewpoint of the constitution of the United 
States which are not in accord with the decisions of the United 
States Supreme Court — in other words, if the state courts refuse 
to recognize the Supreme Court as the final arbiter as to the 
meaning of the United States constitution — we should urge 
upon Congress the necessity of passing the bill introduced 
at its last session providing for an appeal to the Supreme Court 
from the decisions of the state courts on federal questions as 
well in cases in which state laws have been held unconstitu- 
tional from the point of view of the federal constitution as 
in those cases in which they have been held constitutional. If 
that were done, the final judicial interpretation of the United 
States constitution would in all cases be made by that court 
which, whether because of the method of appointing its mem- 

(63) 



J 5 EFFICIENT GO VERNMENT 

bers, or because of the wide public experience which most 
of them have had, or because chey come from widely different 
and differing parts of the coimtry, has shown greater capacity 
than perhaps any other judicial body to treat the constitution of 
the United States as an instrument, to use the words of its 
judges, " made for an undefined and expanding future and for 
a people gathered and to be gathered from many nations and 
of many tongues," as an instrument whose " unchanging pro- 
visions are adaptable to the infinite variety of the changing 
conditions of our national life." 

(64) 



THE AMENDMENT OF THE FEDERAL 
CONSTITUTION ' 

J. DAVID THOMPSON 
Law Librarian, Columbia University 

THE subject of our discussion to-day is the adaptation of 
written constitutions to changing economic and social 
conditions. One method of such adaptation, namely, 
by judicial interpretation of existing provisions, has been treated 
by the previous speaker. It is my purpose to consider a dif- 
ferent method — alteration by the process of formal amend- 
ment, in the particular case of the Federal Constitution. I am 
not, however, concerned with desirable changes in the substan- 
tive part of the constitution, but I wish to direct attention to the 
procedure for making such changes — to the amending clause 
itself. 

When the members of the Federal Convention of 1787 had 
to consider what provision should be made for remedying 
defects in their work which they expected time and experi- 
ence to reveal, there were practically no models or precedents 
to guide them. The state constitutions offered little that was 
suggestive. The Articles of Confederation were virtually un- 
amendable, requiring agreement in Congress and confirmation 
by the legislatures of every state in the Union ; ' in fact, it was 
this very condition that made necessary the calling of a conven- 
tion and the adoption of the new constitution by revolutionary 
methods. 

The delegates to the Federal Convention had, therefore, 
to find a solution to a new problem and the account of the de- 
bates in Madison's journal shows plainly their uncertainty as to 
the form it should take. Randolph's resolution on this subject, 

' Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, Oct. 26, 191 2. 

*Art. xiii. It is interesting to note, however, that Franklin's draft of articles of 
confederation (1775) required amendments submitted by Congress to be approved 
by a majority of the colony assemblies. Cf. Watson, Constitution, pp. 1302- 1303. 

(65) 



1 8 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol.111 

as adopted, merely expressed the sense of the convention that 
amendments should be made whenever necessary, the original 
qualification, " without requiring the consent of the national 
legislature," having been dropped. We are told, however, that 
" several members did not see the necessity of the resolution at 
all." ^ The Pinckney plan provided for the calling of a conven- 
tion on application of two-thirds of the state legislatures and for 
the proposal of amendments by Congress on a two-thirds vote 
in each house, ratification in either case requiring the agree- 
ment of two-thirds of the state legislatures." The committee of 
detail, to which these two drafts were referred, reported a rather 
indefinite clause. It merely provided that on the application of 
the legislatures of two-thirds of the states for an amendment 
Congress should call a convention for that purpose.^ This was 
agreed to, but on the motion to reconsider was criticized by 
Gerry, on the ground that it left the state governments at 
the mercy of a majority of the convention ; by Hamilton, 
because it was inadequate in not providing for the proposal of 
amendments by Congress, which he said would be the first to 
perceive, and would be most sensible to, the necessity for them ; 
by Madison, on the ground of its vagueness. To meet these 
objections, the amendment offered by Sherman gave Congress 
the power to propose amendments without any proviso for a 
two-thirds majority but required the consent of all the states for 
ratification. As this repeated the mistake made in the Articles 
of Confederation Wilson of Pennsylvania proposed to cut 
down the requirement for ratification to two-thirds of the states, 
but this motion was lost by a vote of six to five. Then a com- 
promise was effected on the present basis of three-fourths. At 
this stage Madison proposed and Hamilton seconded a substi- 
tute clause differing only from that which was finally adopted in 
providing that the application of two-thirds of the legislatures 
should be mandatory to Congress for the proposal of amend- 
ments instead of for calling a convention, and this was adopted 

' Elliofs Debates, vol. 5, pp. 128, 157, 182. 

^ Ibid. vol. 5, pp. 132. 

^ Ibid. vol. 5, pp. 381, 498. 

(66) 



No. 2] THE AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION 19 

by nine to one.' In this form it went to the committee on 
style and arrangement, and was reported with only slight verbal 
change. In the further discussion the proposed clause was crit- 
icized on the ground that the ameijdatory power was left too ex- 
clusively to Congress, and the provision for a convention was 
accordingly inserted. Subsequent motions to require ratification 
by all the states, to strike out the alternative provision for ratifi- 
cation by conventions, and to provide for a second general con- 
vention were negatived, and the construction of the present 
unwieldy and cumbersome machinery was complete." 

The few references to this clause in the state conventions 
which followed, particularly the remarks of Mr. Iredell in North 
Carolina, show clearly that it was the expectation of the framers 
that the procedure provided would be found easily workable 
when the need arose.3 On the contrary it has proved, as is well 
known, to be an almost insurmountable obstacle in the way of 
securing either the proposal or the adoption of amendments very 
widely approved by the people. 

The first ten amendmiCnts, known as the bill of rights, were 
rather additions to the constitution than alterations of it. They 
were really initiated by the state conventions, being practically 
the conditions precedent to ratification. The operation of the 
machinery, therefore, presented no difficulty in this case. The 
time required to make them part of the constitution was one year 
and eight months from the time of proposal by Congress.* 

The eleventh amendment, which arose from a difficulty cre- 
ated by a judicial decision (Chisholm v. Georgia,) was of minor 
interest, and was not ratified by the necessary number of states 
until three years and eight months after it was submitted.* 

The twelfth amendment, providing for a change in the polit- 
ical machinery for the election of president, arising out of the 
contest between Jefferson and Burr, and being urgent because a 
new election was approaching, was ratified in ten months.s 

^ Elliofs Debates, vol. 5, pp. 530-532. * Ibid. pp. 551-553. 

^ Ibid. vol. 4, p. 176. See also Federalist, no. 85. 
* Watson, Constitution, vol. 2, p. 131 1. 

^Ames, H. V., Proposed amendments to the constitution, Ann. Rep. Am. Hist. 
Assoc, 1896, vol. 2, p. 79. 

(67) 



20 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

Then followed a period of over half a century, during which 
were introduced upward of four hundred amendments covering 
a wide field of subjects. Six of these were passed by the requi- 
site two-thirds vote in only one house of Congress ; one relating 
to titles of nobility was submitted to the state legislatures and 
lacked only the vote of ofle state of being adopted.' 

It was not, however, until the sixties, when fundamental eco- 
nomic difficulties had to be met, that the real test came and the 
vital weakness of the constitution in its procedure for amend- 
ment was demonstrated. The civil war followed, and after its 
conclusion the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth amendments, 
to define the rights of a new body injected into the citizenship 
of the republic, were added to the constitution by force of the 
superior power of the victors in the struggle. From that time 
no suggested amendment was able to secure the necessary two- 
thirds majority in both houses of Congress until the year 1909, 
a period of forty years. 

Each of the two amendments recently proposed to the state 
legislatures has peculiar features and has been attended by 
special circumstances, making its submission to the states finally 
possible. The income-tax amendment was rendered necessary 
by a flagrant abuse of the judicial power to review acts of Con- 
gress which had been rankling in the public mind for fifteen 
years and which forbade the establishment of a national system 
of taxation on a just and equitable basis. As the result of a 
particular parliamentary situation, a Republican President and 
majority in both houses of Congress found themselves in agree- 
ment with the Democratic minority. It was practically a case 
of proposing a constitutional amendment by unanimious consent. 
The amendment has, however, been pending now for three 
years and three months and still requires ratification by two more 
states for its adoption. 

The proposed amendment for choice of United States Sen- 
ators by popular vote in each state, submitted this year, had been 
the subject of numerous resolutions introduced in Congress 
since 1826 and in some form had secured the requisite two- 
thirds majority in the House of Representatives in each Congress 

' Ames, H. V., Proposed amendments to the constitution, pp. 19-22. 

(68) 



No. 2] THE AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION 2 1 

from the fifty-second.' A large majority of the state legisla- 
tures had repeatedly adopted resolutions recommending this 
amendment. These were finally taking the form of applications 
for a convention to propose amendments, and were rapidly ap- 
proaching the number of two-thirds of the states which would 
have required Congress to call such a convention. Further- 
more, the present constitutional method, which has led to pro- 
longed deadlocks, to the corruption of legislatures, and to the 
election of men subservient to special interests, had been largely 
set aside in many states through direct-primary laws, particu- 
larly where the Oregon system had been adopted. This grow- 
ing pressure of public demand for a more democratic method 
finally reduced the opposing minority in the Senate, the body 
directly affected, to such a point 'that further resistance was 
ineffectual. 

Such, in brief, is the history of this ponderous piece of con- 
stitutional machinery difficult to set in motion and slow and 
uncertain in its operation, fully justifying its vigorous con- 
demnation by eminent publicists at home and abroad. Certain 
other serious objections to it are based (i) on the very unequal 
weight which it gives to public opinion in different parts of the 
country, and (2) on the preponderating influence given to the 
state governments as against the people. 

Under the first of these heads, without going into any elab- 
orate statistical analysis, it is sufficient to point out that, accord- 
ing to the last census, the population of the state of New York 
is greater than that of the eighteen smallest states, yet in finally 
determining constitutional issues the vote of each of the latter 
has equal weight with that of New York. Or in the extreme 
case of the largest and smallest of the states, in point of popu- 
lation, we find that public opinion in Nevada on any amend- 
ment submitted for ratification has a weight more than 100 
times as great per capita as public opinion in this state. Fur- 
thermore, the legislatures of the Pacific and mountain states, 
with those of two adjacent states, comprising not more than 
10 ^ of the population in all, have the power to block a change in 

^The proposition was made in the Federal Convention, but received the support of 
only one state, viz., Pennsylvania. Elliofs Debates, vol. 5, pp. 138, 167-170. 

(69) 
2 * 



22 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

the constitution desired by all the other states in the East, South 
and Middle West, representing 90 ^ of the population. The 
undue influence of the states as states, regardless of their popu- 
lation, is also shown in the arrangement by which the states, 
indirecdy through their equal representation in the Senate and 
directly as units in the ratification process, are consulted twice 
in the course of the amending procedure, whereas the people 
of the states are consulted only once, and indirectly, through 
their representation in the lower house of Congress on the 
basis of population. This predominance of state influence is 
a survival from the old Articles of Confederation and is really 
at variance with the idea of the sovereignty of the people of the 
United States expressed in the preamble of the constitution. 

In looking for suggestions for a better method of amendment 
and one more in accord with modern democratic ideas, we nat- 
urally turn in the first place to a consideration of the experience 
of the several states of the Union and the modifications that 
have been made in their constitutions during the last century and 
a quarter.' This shows that, in contrast with the Federal Con- 
stitution, the various state constitutions have in the course of 
time become more easily adjustable to changing conditions and 
closer approximations to the will of the people through altera- 
tion of their amending clauses : 

( 1 ) to make the submission of amendments less difficult, by 
providing for their proposal in one or more of the following 
ways: (a) by the action of one legislature instead of two suc- 
cessive legislatures; (b) by the ordinary legislative majority in- 
stead of by a special majority {e. g., two-thirds) ; and (c) by 
initiative petition of a certain percentage of the voters. 

(2) to provide for ratification by direct vote of the electors, a 
method which now prevails in every state except Delaware. 

As any amendment of the present procedure for the altera- 
tion of the federal constitution will have to receive the approval 
of three-fourths of the state legislatures for its adoption, it is 
clear that such a proposal must be in conformity with the ideas 

• A full discussion may be found in Dodd, W. F., Revision and amendment of staie 
constitutions, pp. Ii8 ff. 

(70) 



No. 2] THE AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION 23 

which have come to prevail in the several states regarding con- 
stitutional changes and with the methods they have become 
accustomed to employ to effect them.' 

We have, however, to remember that we are dealing with the 
organic law of a federal government as distinguished from that 
of a single state. It is, therefore, desirable to inquire into the 
experience of foreign countries which have had to face the 
problem of framing a federal constitution. Fortunately there 
are two such countries in which instructive models are available 
for our investigation, namely, Switzerland and the Commonwealth 
of Australia. Each of these had the advantage of being able 
to study American experience, both federal and state, with 
regard to the process of amendment. 

Under the Swiss system, originally adopted in 1848 and 
modified in 1874 and again in 1891, amendments may be pro- 
posed either by the ordinary legislative process or by initiative 
petition of 50,000 voters in the form of general suggestions or 
of completed bills. General suggestions are elaborated by the 
Federal Assembly on its agreement thereto or after the ques- 
tion has first been submitted to the people. In the case of 
completed bills, the Federal Assembly may submit with them 
alternative proposals which it recommends. Total revision may 
be undertaken by the Federal Assembly at any time when both 
councils are in agreement; but in case of disagreement, or 
when 50,000 Swiss voters demand such revision, the question is 
submitted first to a popular vote and if a majority of the citizens 
who vote pronounce in the affirmative, a new Federal Assembly 
is elected for this purpose. Proposed changes when formulated 
are submitted to referendum vote ai^d take effect when adopted 

^ A test of opinion in Congress on this matter was recently afforded in connection with 
the admission of New Mexico and Arizona to statehood. By the joint resolution of 
Aug. 21, 191 1, New Mexico was required, as a condition precedent to admission, to 
alter the amending clause of its proposed constitution (6lst Cong., 3d sess., house 
doc. 1369, p. 38) so as to reduce the requirement for the vote of the legislature in 
proposing amendments from two-thirds to a majority of the members of each house 
and for ratification, to substitute a majority of those voting on the proposition in 
place of a majority constituting an affirmative vote equal to at least 40 per cent of the 
votes cast at the election and approval by at least half the counties of the state. 

(71) 



24 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

by the majority of Swiss citizens voting thereon and by a 
majority of the cantons.^ 

Next, let us consider the amending clause of the Australian 
constitution which went into effect in 1901. Though formally 
enacted by the Imperial Parliament.^" this important instrument 
was the result of the deliberations of two conventions of dele- 
gates from the separate colonies, of which the first met in 1891 
and the second held its sessions over a period of three years, 
1897 to 1899. The reports of the debates in these conventions 
are documents of exceptional importance for the study of our 
own constitutional problems, not only because we see in them a 
kindred people with similar traditions grappling afresh with the 
same questions, but also because American experience is con- 
stantly referred to and carefully weighed and analyzed. 

The draft of the bill adopted by the 1891 conventions pro- 
vided that any law for the alteration of the constitution must be 
passed by an absolute majority of both houses and be referred 
to conventions in the several states and for adoption, to be sub- 
mitted to the Governor-General for the Queen's assent, required 
approval by the conventions of a majority of the states, subject 
to the condition that the people of these states were also a ma- 
jority of the people of the commonwealth. The draft of this 
clause adopted by the second convention eight years later, which 
became the final form, shows two significant changes — one 
making the initiation of amendments easier, the other substi- 
tuting a popular referendum for ratification by conventions.* 
The requirement for proposal of amendments became an abso- 
lute majority in each house or, in Case of disagreement, an ab- 
solute majority in one house given twice, the second time after 

* Swiss Federal Constitution, Arts. 1 18-123. -^ ^^ account of the history of this 
procedure is given in Borgeaud's Adoption and amendment of constitutions in 
Europe and America (tr. by C. D. Hazen, N. Y., 1895) pp. 291-332. 

'Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 63 & 64 Vict. ch. 12. 

"National Australasian Convention, Sydney, 1891, Official record of the proceed- 
ings and debates, p. clxxxviii; debated, pp. 428-434. 

'National Australasian Convention, Adelaide, 1897, Official report of the debates, 
pp. 1020-1030, 1204-1209; Australasian Federal Convention, Melbourne, 1898, Of- 
ficial record of the debates (third session), vol. i, pp. 715-772. 

(72) 



No. 2] THE AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION 25 

three months' interval, plus submission on both occasions to the 
other house. Every such law is then to be submitted (after two 
but before six months) to the voters of every state, requiring for 
adoption the approval of the people in a majority of states and 
of a majority of the people voting over the whole Common- 
wealth. 

It must be remembered, however, in endeavoring to adapt 
such a procedure to our own circumstances, that in Australia 
there exist two safeguards which are wanting here, namely 
responsible government and the power of disallowance which 
may be exercised by the British government in case of need. 

The last stage of our inquiry is to consider the modifications 
of article 5 that have been proposed. We have seen that the 
Articles of Confederation did not specify any special majority in 
Congress for the proposal of amendments and that the provision 
for a two-thirds vote was not formulated until a late stage in 
the proceedings of the Federal Convention when Madison and 
Hamilton presented their substitute clause ; also, that the 
motion to make two-thirds of the states the number necessary 
and sufficient for ratification was lost by only one vote. After 
the adoption of the constitution, however, no suggestion for 
facilitating the amending process was presented to Congress 
until January, 1861, when an effort was made to submit the 
" Crittenden Compromise " to a direct vote of the people. 
Such a plebiscite would have been advisory only but it is inter- 
esting to note that such a proposal was made at this time of 
great stress when the machinery provided in the constitution 
proved unworkable. A similar proposition was also offered 
when the fifteenth amendment was under consideration. 

The first actual proposal to establish an easier method of 
amendment was, however, contained in the original draft of the 
resolution for the abolition of slavery, as introduced by Senator 
Henderson of Missouri in January, 1864, a substitute for which 
ultimately became the thirteenth amendment. The clause, 
which was dropped in committee, provided that whenever a 
majority of the members elected to each house, or a convention 
called on the application of the legislatures of a majority of the 
several states, should propose amendments, these in either case 

in) 



26 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

should be valid when ratified by the legislatures of or conven- 
tions in two-thirds of the several states, as Congress should 
direct. The next resolution for a new amending clause was 
introduced in 1873 by Mr. Porter of Virginia. It provided 
that Congress, whenever three-fifths of both houses deem it 
necessary, may propose amendments to the constitution, or may 
call a convention for proposing amendments and revising the 
constitution, and shall be required to call such a convention on 
the application of the legislatures of any number of states, 
embracing three-fifths of the enumerated population of the sev- 
eral states. Amendments proposed by either of these methods 
were to be valid when approved and ratified by a majority of 
the electors in the several states voting thereon, and qualified to 
vote for Representatives in Congress.' 

Of later proposals three are of special interest. Professor J. 
W. Burgess in his Political Science and Comparative Constitu- 
tional Law ^ ( 1 893 ) suggested the following procedure for 
amendment of the Federal Constitution : proposal of amend- 
ments in two successive Congresses by the two houses in joint 
session and by simple majority vote ; submission to the state 
legislatures for ratification by the houses thereof, also acting in 
joint assembly and resolving by simple majority vote ; in 
counting the votes of the legislatures each state should have the 
same weight as is given to it in the electoral college and an 
absolute majority of all the votes to which all the states were 
entitled should be necessary and sufficient for ratification. 

Professor Munroe Smith in his recent discussion of this sub- 
ject 3 has pointed out that we have to consider not only what 
more workable method of amendment seems best adapted to 
our dual system of government but also what changes in the 
amending clause would probably stand the best chance of 
securing the assent of three-fourths of the states. He, therefore, 
suggests as objections to the Burgess plan that, on the one hand, 

'Ames, H. V. Proposed amendments to the constitution, pp. 292-293. 
'Vol. I, p. 152. 

^" Shall we make our constitution flexible? " in North American Review, vol. 194, 
pp. 657-673 (Nov. 191 1). 

(74) 



No. 2] THE AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION 27 

it would be felt that if weighted at all the votes of the states 
should be according to population and, on the other hand, that 
the smaller states would demand equality with the larger and 
would not approve the provision for a joint assembly of Congress, 
as this would destroy the influence of the equal representation of 
the states in the Senate. To meet these difficulties he would 
substitute as the provisions of a new amending clause 

'* proposal of amendments by the majority vote of both houses in two 
successive Congresses ; submission of such proposals to the legislatures 
of the several states or to conventions in the several states or directly 
to the voters in each of the states, as one or another of these modes of 
ratification may be proposed by Congress ; and ratification of proposals 
by a majority of the states, provided that the ratifying states contain, 
according to the last preceding enumeration, a majority of the total 
population of all the states." 

This plan is better in every way than any previous proposal 
and would go a long way towards providing an efficient amend- 
ing procedure. As, however, the proposal of constitutional 
amendments by repeated vote in two successive legislatures 
has been largely abandoned in the case of the state constitu- 
tions in favor of action by a single legislature or other methods, 
it does not seem necessary or desirable to introduce it at this 
date into the amending clause of the Federal Constitution 
without good and sufficient cause. The reason assigned in this 
case is that it would lead to proposals of superior precision 
being submitted for ratification. But it seems probable that 
this result could be attained more directly and effectively by the 
establishment of the proposed legislative drafting bureau for 
Congress. In cases of disagreement between the two houses of 
Congress on a matter of constitutional change it might well be 
provided that amendments could be proposed by majority vote 
of one house in two successive Congresses, as an alternative to 
proposal by majority vote of both houses in one Congress. 

With regard to the ratification process it may be remarked 
that the object of this is to take the sense of the sovereign peo- 
ple on the amendments submitted. The interposition of repre- 
sentative bodies, either the ordinary legislatures or conventions 

(75) 



28 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

elected ad hoc, without power to amend the proposals but 
merely authorized to ratify or reject them, is little more than 
an indirect and unsatisfactory method of counting the votes for 
and against. In competition with the method of the direct 
vote of the electors which the people are accustomed to use in 
amending state constitutions, it is more than probable that rati- 
fication by the state legislatures or by conventions would go to 
the wall, just as the convention method, though theoretically 
the better way, has never been chosen by Congress in submit- 
ting amendments on account of the greater practical advantages 
of ratification by the state legislatures. Furthermore, the plan 
makes no provision for the proposal of amendments on the 
initiative of the states. In view of the fact that the state 
governments are becoming laboratories for trying out political 
inventions, it is to be expected that some important devices for 
a better system* of government, including particularly methods 
of regulating industry and commerce, will be discovered in 
them. It is important that the new machinery for the proposal 
of amendments should provide a means of presenting these for 
general adoption throughout the country. 

All of these specifications for a new amending clause are met 
in the joint resolution introduced into Congress by Senator 
LaFollette towards the close of the last session, which presents 
the following: 

Article XVIII. The Congress, whenever an absolute majority of both 
houses shall deem it necessary, or on application of ten states by 
resolution adopted In each by the legislature thereof or by a majority 
of the electors voting thereon, shall propose amendments to this con- 
stitution to be submitted in each of the several states to the electors 
qualified to vote for the election of Representatives, and the vote shall 
be taken at the next ensuing election of Representatives in such man- 
ner as the Congress prescribes. And if in a majority of the states a 
majority of the electors voting approve the proposed amendments, and 
if a majority of all the electors voting also approve the proposed 
amendments, they shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as part of 
this constitution. 

This proposal, it will be seen, embodies and adapts the prin- 

(76) 



No. 2] THE AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION 29 

ciples that have been tested both in the several states and in the 
foreign countries which have been considered. One objection 
will perhaps be made to it, namely, that it does not take account 
of the fact that in some states women are entitled to vote as 
well as men and that these states would add a disproportionate 
number to the total vote throughout the country. A similar 
situation confronted the framers of the Australian constitution 
and they met the difficulty by providing that " until the quali- 
fication of electors of members of the House of Represen- 
tatives becomes uniform throughout the commonwealth only 
one-half the votes for and against the proposed law shall be 
counted in any state in which adult suffrage prevails." This 
clause, however, proved to be entirely unnecessary because 
before the first proposed amendments to the Australian con- 
stitution were submitted the enfranchisement of women had 
been achieved in every state. On account of the recent remark- 
able development of the equal-suffrage movement in the United 
States it seems likely that by the time any new amending clause 
shall have received the approval of two-thirds of both houses 
of Congress and of the legislatures of three-fourths of the states 
this difficulty will have vanished. A temporary provision to 
meet it would not, however, interfere with the general plan of 
Senator LaFoUette's resolution. 

As this proposition provides, with adequate safeguards, suf- 
ficient facility for the proposal of amendments which are widely 
supported and for their incorporation into the constitution when 
a majority of the states and of the whole electorate have ex- 
pressed their approval, it is worthy of the earnest consideration 
of those who, in the words of Professor Munroe Smith, have 
*' realized that the first article in any sincerely intended pro- 
gressive program must be the amendment of the amending 
clause of the Federal Constitution." 

{77) 



THE REORGANIZATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT' 

HENRY JONES FORD 
Professor of Politics, Princeton University 

TO understand the events of our times we must see them 
in true perspective. There is one notion that we must 
discard, namely, that our existing state constitutions 
represent constitutional arrangements made by the fathers, and 
having back of them the weight of their authority and influence. 
I think that idea is wrong. We have only to consider our polit- 
ical history to find that our state constitutions were simply pro- 
visional arrangements to meet a casual emergency. There was 
no idea that they should be regarded as fixing the type of gov- 
ernment. They were a sort of act of settlement to provide 
some basis for action with the expectation that political expe- 
rience would eventually bring governmental institutions into 
accord with the needs of the people. 

This thought received strong expression in some early docu- 
uments. In the Federalist (no. 47) Madison remarked: 

I wish not to be regarded as an advocate for the particular organiza- 
tions of the several state governments. I am fully aware that among 
the many excellent principles which they exemplify, they carry strong 
marks of the haste, and still stronger of the inexperience, under which 
they are framed. 

And again in the Federalist (no. 37) he said: 

It may be pronounced with assurance that the people of this country 
will never be satisfied until some remedy be applied to the vicissitudes 
and uncertainties which characterize the state administrations. 

No. 15 of the Federalist is virtually an analysis of the 
defects and incapacity of state administration, and it was just 
such defects that energized the movement for our national 

' Address delivered at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 
26, 1912. 

(78) 



REORGANIZATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT 31 

constitution. In the constitutional convention of 1787 Mercer 
of Maryland bluntly declared that the real business in hand 
was to 

protect the people against those speculating legislatures, which are now- 
plundering them throughout the United States. 

Mercer's analysis of the situation, reported in Madison's 
Journal for August 14, 1787, is remarkable for its prescience. 
He argued that unless the executive is directly connected with 
the legislature, its members will prey upon the people instead of 
defending the people. He said : 

The governments of America will become aristocracies. They are so 
already. The public measures are calculated for the benefit of the 
governors, not the people. The people are dissatisfied and complain. 
They change their rulers, and the public measures are changed, but it 
is only a change of one scheme of emolument to the rulers, for another. 
The people gain nothing by it, but an addition of instability to their 
other evils. 

As a remedy Mercer proposed what is now designated as cab- 
inet government. He argued that " the executive ought to have 
a council, being members of both Houses." 

The distrust of existing forms of authority was so great at 
that period that Jefferson, then in France, felt it as strongly as 
statesmen at home. On December 20, 1787, Jefferson wrote to 
Madison : " The instability of our laws is really an immense evil. 
I think it would be well to provide in our constitution that there 
shall always be a twelve-month between the engrossing of a bill 
and the passing of it." 

These citations are typical of two tendencies very marked in 
our political history. Mercer's words show that he was looking 
toward structural order, whereas Jefferson looked toward re- 
straint upon details of procedure. The latter tendency has so 
far governed constitutional change in this country. Owing 
to the notion that the way to guard against abuse of power is 
to multiply checks upon the exercise of power, our state con- 
stitutions are schemes of restriction constantly increasing in 
complexity. There has been continual change without im- 

(79) 



32 



EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 



provement. From 1776 to 1909, 127 distinct state constitutions 
have been adopted in this country. We have no record from 
which to get the exact number of amendments, but from 1894 
to 1904, 381 constitutional amendments were proposed, of 
which 217 were adopted. The process has had curious results. 
For instance, if you examine the constitution of Maryland, you 
will find in the bill of rights a declaration that " for the redress 
of grievances and for amending and strengthening the laws the 
legislature ought to be frequently convened." But the process 
of change since has been such that a provision has been in- 
serted prohibiting the legislature from meeting more than once 
in two years, unless specially convoked by the governor. 

Hostility to legislative sessions has become a general char- 
acteristic of our state constitutions. There has been a marked 
movement toward biennial and even quadrennial sessions. It 
is plain that there has been a displacement of the legislature 
from its normal position as the body representing the people. 
Constitutional provisions exhibit the legislature as being a 
misrepresentative body against which precautions must be 
taken. When you compare American constitutions with those 
of other countries, you will observe that restrictions upon 
legislative authority are an American peculiarity. European 
state constitutions assume that the legislative assembly will fulf 1 
its proper functions ; American constitutions are framed en 
the assumption that the legislature will misbehave unless sub- 
ject to restraint. 

Another American peculiarity is the expansion of the execu- 
tive negative. After every session in New York or Pennsyl- 
vania the governor sits in judgment upon hundreds of enact- 
ments, determining which shall be law and which not. A 
similar exaltation of executive prerogative is seen in the action 
of governors dealing with the appropriation bills. In 1909 
Governor Stuart of Pennsylvania cut $20,000,000 from the ap- 
propriation bills by his vetoes. According to the traditional 
scheme the governor is the chief executive and it is the function 
of the representative assembly to control his actions, but now, 
instead of depending on the legislatures to control the governors, 
the people depend upon the governors to control the legisla- 

(80) 



No. 2] REORGANIZATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT 33 

tures. That is a very singular constitutional development, 
without parallel in other countries. 

Another marked feature is the expansion of judicial authority, 
It cannot be understood unless we consider the moral basis as 
well as the legal basis. An abnorfnal extension of jurisdiction 
has been forced upon the courts through stress of necessity. 
Consider such a situation as that which existed in Montana after 
the legislature adjourned in 1907. The enactments of the ses- 
sion were so full of mistakes that the official publication made 
by the secretary of state contained the following notice : 
" The within are exact copies of the enrolled laws as the same 
reached this office, and neither this office nor the printer em- 
ployed in the work is responsible for spelling or punctuation." 
One law, presumably meant to prevent the sale of diseased 
meat, imposed a severe penalty on the sale of "deceased" 
meat. Compliance with the law as it stood would have required 
butchers to supply their customers with live cattle. This is an 
instance of the sort of legislation that compels American judges 
to do what the judges of no other civilized country have to do, 
namely, go behind the language of the act to consider the mo- 
tives and intentions of the legislature, the practical result being 
to substitute judicial discretion for legislative action. It is 
true that the law-making power has been virtually transferred 
from the legislature to the courts, but this result is to be im- 
puted to legislative incapacity rather than to judicial arrogance. 
Those who are inclined to attribute to the federal nature of our 
government the powers over law-making exercised by American 
judges should consider the fact that no such tendency has been 
developed in Switzerland or Germany. Some tendencies ap- 
peared in Germany in that direction, and Brinton Coxe, in his 
treatise entitled " Judicial Power and Ujiconstitutional Legisla- 
tion" collected a number of cases. But the courts refrained 
from courses that American courts have followed, not so much 
because of a difference in the legal situation as because of dif- 
ferences in the moral situation. When statutes are known to be 
a mature and circumspect expression of public opinion, judges 
will hesitate to set up a contrary opinion of their own, and in- 
deed the principle has been laid down in the courts of Germany 

3 (81) 



34 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

that a constitutional provision is to be understood as a rule for 
the legislative power to interpret. No such attitude of serious 
opinion could exist in regard to the legislative power in this 
country, as its activities are too crude and irresponsible to com- 
mand respect. The abnormal exaltation of judicial authority in 
America is correlated with an abnormal degradation of legisla- 
tive authority. Rectify the legislative situation and the judicial 
situation will settle itself. 

Efforts to obtain good government by constitutional restraint 
have about reached their limit, and the political philosophy 
from which they issued is becoming obsolete. American con- 
stitutions started at a time when there was a habit of regarding 
government as a thing distinct and apart from the people, so 
that popular liberty implied limitation of the sphere of govern- 
ment. Now government is coming to be regarded simply as 
an institutional embodiment of the will of the people. It is 
their agency, existing for their service, so that impairment of 
its power is an abatement of the sovereignty of the people. 
The people are now demanding a revision of the system of 
government, not to put more checks on the government but to 
take possession of the government itself. Questions of funda- 
mental organization are now engaging consideration. This 
disposition affrights conservative sentiment, but while the polit- 
ical mythology usually invoked in opposition to reform does 
not deserve any respect, the anxiety is not baseless. It is not 
true that the system against which radical reformers are in revolt 
expresses the wisdom of the Fathers, but it is true that organic 
change is a dangerous process. History tells us that the mak- 
ing over of constitutions is a process that is apt to draw blood. 
The French Revolution has not lost its importance as a warn- 
ing. But by using one's judgment instead of one's imagination 
to reach conclusions I think it will appear that risks attending 
the renovation of our state constitutions are closely limited by 
the essentially municipal nature of state authority. No matter 
what blunders may take place they will result in public loss 
and inconvenience rather than public disorder. It will be a 
dry revolution and not a wet revolution even at the worst. 

The influences making for a reorganization of state govern- 

(82) 



No. 2] REORGANIZATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT 35 

ment are now so strong that a change of type is not likely to 
be deferred for many years. The eighteenth-century doctrine 
of the separation of powers was at one time as generally 
applied in city constitutions as it still is in state constitutions. 
It has been overthrown by the introduction of the commission 
plan of government, and the general improvement of municipal 
government ensuing from the spread of the new model is 
affecting public opinion as regards state government. It would 
be still more influential were it not that the body in which the 
commission plan connects the executive and legislative powers 
is too small for state use. But for difficulty on that point 
attempts might have been made before now to adopt the com- 
mission plan in state government. The way in which the com- 
mission plan has directed public attention to the advantages of 
direct connection between the executive and legislative powers 
will be fruitful in constitutional results. 

The most significant indication of the tendency of the times 
is, I think, the new constitution which the Oregon reformers 
are endeavoring to introduce by popular initiative. In essence, 
it proposes that the governor shall be the general manager of 
the public business, meeting with the representative assembly as 
with a board of directors. He will appoint his cabinet, he will 
have the right to prepare the budget and propose his measures, 
and if his measures are rejected he will have the privilege of 
submitting them to the direct vote of the people. In acquiring 
these powers, he will no longer have the veto power. His 
duty will be to digest and propose measures, not to forbid 
what the legislature may have done. His power becomes 
positive instead of negative. 

Not merely in Oregon, but even here in New York the trend 
of opinion is in the same general direction. It hardly seems 
possible to do anything more to increase the governor's power 
of negative action. The next step in order is to give him 
power of positive action ; that is to say, instead of a power of 
veto he should have a power of initiative. Just such a con- 
stitutional change has already been proposed by Henry L. 
Stimson, at one time Republican party candidate for governor 
of New York and at the present time Secretary of War in 

(83) 



36 



EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 



President Taft's cabinet. In a speech at Cleveland, on Jan. 28, 
1 9 1 1 , he said of the governor : 

Give him the same power to select and control his cabinet and the 
heads of his departments which is possessed by the President of the 
United States, especially with an absolute and unconditional power of 
removal. The same power should be carried through all of the execu- 
tive departments through which is administered the regulative control 
of our public service corporations and other public utilities. Give him 
the undisputed right, not only to suggest, but to frame and introduce 
his own legislative measures, giving to such measures a right of pre- 
cedence on the legislative calendar. Do away, for instance, with the 
spectacle that we have seen too often in New York, of measures desired 
by the governor held up apparently by the action of the clerk of the 
assembly. If the governor's power over legislation under such con- 
ditions should prove to be great, it could always be checked by the use 
of an optional popular referendum. 

The short-ballot movement makes in the same direction. 
How are you going to shorten the ballot except by treating the 
governor as a general manager, filling subordinate positions by 
appointment, subject to responsibility for results, through 
close connection vi^ith the representative assembly? It is a 
familiar business principle that discretion and responsibility go 
together. In acquiring the power to propose and explain his 
measures directly to the legislature, and to bring them to 
determination, it will no longer be necessary for him to use 
official patronage as a fund with which to bribe the legislature 
to consider the public business, and it will be politically incon- 
venient to make appointments on other grounds than adminis- 
trative efficiency. 

The ideas and influences that I have sketched are yet to 
receive institutional embodiment, but that is simply a question 
of time. If an efficient type of state government appears any- 
where it will spread everywhere. Certainly the present situation 
cannot endure. Its evils are not irremediable. The forces of 
progress will find a way out. I am sufficiently optimistic to 
believe that a reorganization of state authority is about to begin 
that will give the American people that which they have never 
had — institutions of efficient government. 

(84) 



THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS' 
William Draper Lewis 

Dean of the Law School of the University of Pennsylvania 

THE subject which I have been asked to discuss is usually 
called, though I think miscalled, " the recall of judicial 
decisions." It is proposed that, when an act passed by 
a state legislature shall have been declared contrary to the con- 
stitution, if a given fraction of the electorate shall petition to 
have the act referred to popular vote, it shall be so referred, 
and the people after a period for deliberation shall be given an 
opportunity to vote directly on it. If a majority of the people 
vote in favor of the act, it shall thereafter become law. As actu- 
ally advanced in national and state Progressive platforms, the 
proposition is not only limited to decisions of state courts in- 
terpreting provisions in state constitutions, but is further limited 
to acts passed under the police power. Thus, the national plat- 
form of the Progressive party pledges that party to provide 
" that when an act passed under the police power of the state is 
held unconstitutional under the state constitutions by the courts, 
the people, after an ample interval for deliberation, shall have 
an opportunity to vote on the question whether they desire the 
act to become a law notwithstanding such decision." 

It is, therefore, clear that those of us who advocate this new 
method of dealing with certain constitutional questions believe 
that its real usefulness is largely, if not wholly, confined to the 
situation which arises when an act passed under the police power 
of the state is declared contrary to the state constitution. The 
police power of the state is the general power to pass laws which 
direct the conduct of the individual or private associations of 
individuals, which says that we must do this or that. It there- 
fore includes practically every law except those which relate to 
the conduct of public officials or the organization and the oper- 

' Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 26, 1912. 

3 * (85) 



38 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

ation of the government. All acts dealing with social and in- 
dustrial conditions are passed under the so-called police power. 
All acts regulating the conditions of employment, payment of 
wages in store orders, tenement-house conditions, and other acts 
designed to correct the more obvious social and economic in- 
justices of our present industrial system, are police laws. 

A large part of the present criticism of courts and judges, as 
well as the growing antagonism towards our constitutional sys- 
tem, is due to the decisions of state courts holding void at- 
tempts to enact legislation which many believe necessary to 
correct the more glaring injustices of our present industrial 
system. The so-called " recall of judicial decisions" is, at the 
present time, the only constructive proposal advanced to meet 
a condition which is giving grave concern to those who still be- 
lieve that government under a written constitution is the best 
form of government for a democracy. As such it demands our 
careful consideration. 

In order that we may be in a position to judge the proposal 
on its merits, a preliminary word must be said in regard to 
what we may call social and industrial legislation, and the peculiar 
function performed by the courts when they declare such acts 
as a compulsory workmen's compensation act contrary to the in- 
herent rights of the individual. 

Each country has always its social and economic problems, 
because man, considered collectively, has always the power 
of further progress. The problem of further progress is one of 
method. In any society the proper method of improvement 
becomes a matter of political controversy when a proposition 
which, it is alleged, will have the desired result and which 
involves a change in existing law or public administration, 
is made in such a way as to command serious attention from, 
those having the power to effect the change. Every economic 
political controversy resolves itself into the question : Is it or is 
it not wise for society to change by law, in the manner pro- 
posed, the conditions under which the individual makes his 
choice of action? 

Two illustrations will make my meaning clear. A given 
country has no tariff. A protective tariff is proposed. The 

(86) 



No. 2] THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS 39 

question is, will there be greater progress economically if the 
law changes the existing legal conditions under which the 
individual now makes contracts for the purchase of certain pro- 
ducts? Again, a given community has no law governing the 
hours of labor. A proposal is made to pass a law prohibit- 
ing the employment of women for more than ten hours a day. 
The question is, should society change in the way proposed the 
conditions under which the contract of employment is made? 
In neither case is it proposed that society shall directly coerce 
the individual. No one is to be obliged to purchase goods or 
employ women. But in each case the law proposed limits the 
range of choice ; if one buys from abroad he must pay duty ; 
if he employs women he cannot do so for more than ten hours 
a day. Again, in the second illustration, the proposed law, 
theoretically at least, limits the woman's range of choice ; she 
cannot contract to work more than ten hours. I say theoretic- 
ally, because practically the economic situation of the woman 
may give her no real choice — she must take what is offered. 

When we are confronted with the question whether it is wise 
to adopt a particular tariff schedule or a particular law govern- 
ing the hours of labor, two things influence our decision. We 
have the facts bearing on the particular question. But we have 
also our existing prejudices or principles, call them what you 
will, relating to the limit to which society should go in im- 
posing restrictive legal conditions. The difference between us 
at any given time is one of degree. The most extreme indi- 
vidualist admits that in some cases restrictive legal conditions 
of a drastic character should be imposed. Thus, no one 
objects to a law prohibiting the general sale of certain dele- 
terious or poisonous drugs, or a law prohibiting the employ- 
ment in dangerous industries of little children, even with the 
consent of the children and their parents. On the other hand, 
the most advanced progressive would regard a law limiting the 
hours of work for women to two hours in any consecutive 
twenty-four hours as arbitrary and unjust, or would oppose a 
compulsory workmen's compensation act which required the 
employer to pay to any workman who was permanently disabled 
by an accident occurring in the business double wages for life. 

(87) 



40 



EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 



We all of us, conservative and progressive alike, have what we 
may describe as a mental scale, relating to the limits of regula- 
tory legislation. At one end of the scale are supposed legis- 
lative acts, like the act prohibiting the employment of women 
more than two hours a day, which we regard, not merely as un- 
wise, but as unjust and arbitrary. Further down the scale we 
come to laws, such as a law limiting the hours of employment of 
women to ten hours in any twenty-four, which we think wise or 
unwise, but which do not, even if we regard them as unwise, 
shock our sense of fairness. Lastly, at the other end of the 
scale, we have those laws which, while restrictive, we regard as 
expressing the unquestioned duty of society toward the indi- 
vidual, such as a law prohibiting the employment of little chil- 
dren in dangerous occupations. 

Each of us has a more or less distinct mental scale of this 
kind. It may change from day to day or remain throughout 
our lives largely the same. That depends upon our experience 
and our temperament. We may think little of public questions, 
and our scale maybe largely an unconscious one; but when 
forced to pass judgment upon a given proposal, out of our ex- 
perience and environment and the extent and character of our 
study and observation, we reach a decision for or against the 
proposal by fitting such facts as we think have particular bear- 
ing on the question into the scale of arbitrary, unwise, debatable, 
wise, and essential governmental regulations, placing restrictive 
legal conditions on the individual choice of action. 

While, however, each of us has such a scale, the scale of no 
two men is ever precisely alike. Certain legislation may be 
arbitrary and unfair to all of us. When, however, we pass from 
acts arbitrary to acts unwise, no two of us draw the same line. 
Indeed, few or none of us draw a very sharp line between arbi- 
trary and unwise legal restrictions. The two classes of acts im- 
perceptibly shade into each other; but the shadow on the 
scale that marks the passage from clearly arbitrary to debatable 
acts in any two individuals is never in the same place. Take, 
for instance, an eight-hour day for women. Some think that 
a wise proposal, some unwise, others regard it as more than 
merely unwise, as arbitrary, unfair, and destructive of the 
fundamental right of liberty of action. 

(88) 



No. 2] THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS 41 

Differences of opinion of this kind on such a measure as an 
eight-hour law exist in every country. Everywhere disputes 
arise as to the justice or wisdom of society in placing legal re- 
strictions on the wage contract, employment of children, or the 
use of this or that kind of property. In all other countries, 
however, except the United States, such questions are settled 
finally by the legislature. When the legislature has passed the 
act, though many may think such action arbitrary interference 
with the individual and therefore more than merely unwise, 
nevertheless the legislature has spoken and the act is law. We 
alone, of all people, live under a system of government in 
which the courts have been given or have assumed the power 
to examine into the nature of the act, and declare it void, if it 
appears to them more than merely unwise ; if, in short, in their 
mental scale it falls into the class of acts arbitrarily interfering 
with the individual's liberty or property. 

You will note that I say that the courts here either have 
been given or have assumed this right. This is a subject on 
which those learned in our constitutional history differ. No 
one, at least no responsible person, accuses the courts of having 
assumed, without any grounds for the assumption, that they 
could disregard acts of the legislature which to them arbitrarily 
restricted the individual's choice of action. Some earlier judges 
took the position that a legislative act which interfered with 
what they regarded as inherent individual rights, was void 
because free governments were established to protect such 
rights, and when the people adopted a constitution and vested 
all legislative power in a legislature, they impliedly withheld 
the power to deprive the individual of his inherent rights. In 
modern times, as we have drifted away from the assumption 
that man has " inherent rights," the courts in setting aside acts 
of the legislature which to them appear grossly arbitrary, have 
relied on express declarations in the bill of rights which ac- 
companies every state constitution. Now there are in the fed- 
eral constitution and in all state constitutions clauses which it 
may be contended were intended to prohibit legislation arbi- 
trarily interfering with the individual's freedom of action or 
with his right to use his property as he thinks best. The fifth 

(89) 



42 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

amendment to the federal constitution provides that the federal 
government shall not deprive any one of " life, liberty, or 
property, without due process of law." The fourteenth amend- 
ment imposes a similar prohibition on the states. Provisions 
similarly worded are found in a large number of state constitu- 
tions. In some constitutions we find in the bill of rights an 
express declaration that all men have " certain indefeasible 
rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life 
and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property 
and reputation and of pursuing their own happiness." 

In interpreting the meaning of these clauses the courts were 
obliged to determine two questions. First, did or did not those 
who adopted the constitution by inserting these words intend 
to declare that the legislature should not pass an act arbitrarily 
interfering with the individual's liberty or property, or did they 
merely intend to declare that an administrative officer or any 
one else should not, without the warrant of legislative act, inter- 
fere with the individual's liberty or property? Practically all 
our courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States, 
have decided that the clause relating to due process of law and 
similar clauses prohibit arbitrary legislative interference with 
the individual's freedom of action, whether in the use of prop- 
erty or in the making of contracts. The publicist or constitu- 
tional lawyer, examining our history, may doubt the correct- 
ness of this conclusion ; but there has been no vacillation in the 
position of our courts. 

Having decided that the clauses referred to prohibit acts of 
the legislature arbitrarily interfering with the individual in his 
use of his property or his power to make such contracts as he 
pleases, the courts were confronted by a second question. The 
constitution, while prohibiting arbitrary legislative interference 
with the liberty of the individual, does not give any standard 
by which to judge an act as to whether or not it is arbitrary. 
Should the courts therefore refuse to enforce the provisions of 
the constitution, or should they do the best they can and declare 
those acts void which impress them as unquestionably arbitrary 
and unfair, or which are in their opinion arbitrary and unfair 
according to generally received standards? I do not mean to 

(90) 



No. 2] THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS 43 

say that the judges went through any such analysis in the first 
cases involving the contention that an act deprived a person of 
his liberty without due process of law because it interfered 
arbitrarily with his right to make a particular contract or use 
his property in a particular way. The law does not grow in 
that way. For instance, in 1884, the late Judge Gordon, of the 
supreme court of Pennsylvania, was presented with the question, 
is an act prohibiting the payment of wages in store orders con- 
stitutional? He did not consider it necessary to examine 
elaborately its provisions or to analyze the processes by which 
he came to the conclusion that it was contrary to a state con- 
stitutional provision. To him such an act was without question 
well within that part of his mental scale of restrictive legal acts 
labeled " arbitrary and unfair." His state had a constitution ; 
the constitution had a bill of rights in which was a general 
clause inserted to prevent arbitrary legislation. To him the 
act in question was abitrary legislation. He had no doubt 
about it. And, therefore, he contented himself with remarking 
that the act was one which could not be passed in this country. 

From the time of Marshall's decision in Marbury z;. Madison, 
the people of this country have been familiar with the court's 
refusal to regard as law acts of the legislature contrary to the 
constitution. Though there had always been a few people who 
insisted that the courts should follow the legislative act, leaving 
it to the people at the polls to rebuke the legislature, most of us 
have always seen the importance, if we are to preserve govern- 
ment under written constitutions, of the decision of the great 
Chief Justice. We have also recognized the logical strength of 
the position that if a court finds a legislative act clearly in con- 
flict with a provision of the constitution under which the legis- 
lature acts, the courts should follow the constitution and not 
the legislative act. 

The function preformed by the court in most constitutional 
cases is to preserve the intent of the people on some clearly 
defined subject as expressed in the constitution. For instance, 
experience convinces the majority of the people that the 
legislature should not have power to pass a law applying to one 
borough. They adopt a constitution in which they expressly 

(91) 



44 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

say that no special law shall be passed relating to one borough. 
Subsequently, the legislature passes a bill which violates this 
provision. The court in refusing to recognize the law is pre- 
serving the constitution as the people adopted it. 

For a long time it was assumed that when an act imposing 
restrictive legal conditions was overthrown by a court because 
it deprived individuals, "without due process of law," of the 
right to contract or to use their property, the court was per- 
forming a function in no way different from its function in any 
other constitutional case. In one sense this is true. The con- 
stitution does say: "No one shall be deprived of life, liberty, 
or property, without due process of law," and in the opinion of 
the court the act in question does so deprive the individual. In 
disregarding the act the court is preserving the constitution. 
But why does the act, which we will say restricts the hours of 
labor, deprive persons of their liberty or property without due 
process? There are three possible answers: first, because it is 
arbitrary in the opinion of the court; or second, because it is 
arbitrary according to the court's opinion as to what was con- 
sidered arbitrary legislation at the time of the adoption of the 
constitution; or third, because it is arbitrary according to the 
present generally received opinion of what is arbitrary. In 
any case, the court is not, as in all other constitutional cases, 
interpreting a precise declaration in the constitution, but is 
measuring by some more or less uncertain mental scale what 
is and what is not arbitrary and unfair legal restriction on 
individual action. 

It is perhaps a fair question whether the action of our courts 
in this class of cases is or is not in accordance with the ideas of 
those who put into our federal and state constitutions bills of 
rights containing clauses against depriving a person of his 
liberty or property without due process of law, or similar gen- 
eral declarations. Quite aside from this question, there is 
much to be said in practise for a system which provides that 
an act of the legislature, which in the opinion of men trained 
in the law, and having a knowledge of our legal history, arbi- 
trarily interferes with the freedom of the individual to contract, 
or do some other act, should not become a law until the people 

(92) 



No. 2] THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS 45 

have a chance to say at the polls whether or not they wish that 
act to become law. Admitting that no other civilized country 
lives under a system in which the judges act practically like a 
council of elder statesmen, vetoing acts which shock their sense 
of justice, is there not much to be said in favor of the system? 

At the same time the most thorough Tory and Conservative 
among us has never contended for a moment that, if a per- 
sistent majority of the people want an act, they should not have 
the right to put their desire into effect in spite of the opinion 
of the court that the act arbitrarily deprives a person of his 
liberty or property. The only difference is as to the method 
by which this desire on the part of the persistent majority of 
the people should be carried out. At the present time we have 
only one method, the formal amendment of the constitution. 
If, for instance, in New York a compulsory workmen's com- 
pensation act is declared to be contrary to the state constitution 
because it arbitrarily takes the property of the employer away 
from him without due process of law, under existing conditions 
the people of New York, if they have a persistent desire for the 
act, must amend their state constitution. Indeed, this is what 
they are doing at the present time. Why, it may be asked, is 
not this a perfectly satisfactory method? 

Let us admit that it is not wholly unsatisfactory. An amend- 
ment can be drawn and has been drawn reciting what are 
regarded as the essential elements of a compulsory workmen's 
compensation act; on the adoption of this amendment the act 
can be re-passed. This method of formal amendment, in con- 
trast to the so-called recall of judicial decisions, is often spoken 
of as " the orderly method of amendment." And yet is it 
orderly? After you adopt your amendment how does your 
constitution read? In effect it reads as follows: "Arbitrary 
legislation interfering with the individual's freedom of contract 
or taking his property shall not be passed, but any act having 
the essential elements of a compulsory workmen's compensation 
act, no matter how arbitrary, may be passed." The process of 
amendment may be orderly ; but is there not something which 
looks very much like disorder in the result? Should the 
courts of any state declare much legislation affecting social and 

(93) 



46 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

industrial conditions unconstitutional because it deprives the 
individual of his liberty or his property without due process of 
law, the constitution of that state would soon become in large 
part a series of long statements as to what could be done in 
spite of the due-process-of-law clause. It does not take much 
foresight to perceive that if in any state there exists for any 
length of time a difference of opinion as to the necessity for and 
arbitrary character of certain social legislation passed under the 
so-called police power of the state, it will not be long before 
the people will adopt an amendment wiping out forever the 
due-process provision of their bill of rights. 

The real trouble with our present method of amending the 
due-process-of-law clause whenever the courts under that clause 
have declared unconstitutional an act persistently desired by 
the people, is that it is not an orderly because not a scientific 
method of meeting the situation. The method of formal 
amendment in such cases fails to recognize the nature of the 
function which the court has performed in this class of consti- 
tutional cases. The court has not declared that the act violates 
a provision in the constitution which is clear, precise and defi- 
nite, and which if the people do not like they should abolish. 
The real situation is that the court has been given, or has 
assumed, whichever you will, under this due-process-ot-law 
clause or some other similar clause in the bill of rights, the 
right or power to declare unconstitutional an act which is con- 
trary either to its own or to the generally received ideas of 
social justice, and therefore subversive of inherent individual 
rights. What the people need in such a case is not the power 
to adopt formal amendments to the due-process-of-law clause ; 
it is not the power to take a whole realm of possible legislation 
and declare that thereafter any law falling within this realm, no 
matter how arbitrary, shall thereafter be constitutional. The 
court has declared in effect that a certain act is arbitrary, and 
as such subversive of the rights of the individual. But if in 
fact the act, to the majority of the people, does not seem arbi- 
trary, they should have a method by which the act can become 
law, without forcing them, by the passage of formal amend- 
ments to the due-process clause of the bill of rights, to deprive 

(94) 



No. 2] THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS 47 

the court of all power to arrest social legislation of the same 
class, however arbitrary or unfair such legislation may be. 
This is exactly the power which it is proposed to give to the 
people by the proposition known as the recall of judicial 
decisions. In one sense it is a method of temporarily amend- 
ing the constitution. In another it is an attempt to preserve 
the present power of the courts to stop legislation which they 
believe contrary to the sense of social justice persistently prev- 
alent in the community from going into effect until that com- 
munity has been given an opportunity to express through the 
ballot its own opinion of the act. 

(95) 



THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS' 

CLARENCE D. ASHLEY 
Dean of the Law School of New York University 

NO reasonable, thoughtful man would attempt to sustain 
the proposition for the recall of judicial decisions in its 
widest sense. Judicial decisions may occur in litigation 
between parties, and the title does not necessarily exclude jur^' 
trials. Of course no one really desires to have a recall which 
shall apply to such cases. We have recently had a murder 
trial, and the jury has reached a certain conclusion. There is 
an appeal to the court of appeals. Suppose we exclude the 
verdict of the jury, and confine the question to the decision of 
the court. Do we mean that in case the court decides for re- 
versal there should be an appeal to popular vote? Of course 
such an idea is absurd. Yet many suppose the proposition to 
be that the people shall pass on any judicial decision, whether 
arising in individual cases or in those concerning governmental 
and general public interest. In the first place, if we limit the 
proposal to cases of public interest it becomes difficult to draw 
the line between such questions and those concerning the indi- 
vidual. A man tried for murder is personally much concerned, 
and so is the public. When it concerns the police, the govern- 
ment also is interested. These trials, then, are of public inter- 
est. Very few will attempt to draw the line here, and the best 
thinkers have wisely limited the proposal to some specific topic. 
One prominent writer says that he would limit the recall to 
cases of due process of law. What is meant by that term ? 
What does the constitution mean? Some lawyers may have a 
definite answer for this question. Personally I have not, and I 
have not met one who has. In a special instance you may say 
that certain action deprives the defendant of due process and is 
forbidden by the constitution, but can you say generally how 
"due process" should be defined? Do you mean that the 

' Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 26, 191 2. 

(96) 



THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS 49 

courts are to have power to determine whether in a given case 
the question of due process has arisen or not, and whether the 
recall is applicable to the case? Surely it is not intended to 
leave the determination of this question to the courts. That 
would negative the whole proposition. And who is to decide if 
the courts do not? Suppose that in some way a judicial de- 
cision is about to be submitted to the people for review, and 
some one wishes to enjoin this submission on the theory that 
this is not a proper case for the exercise of the recall, in that it 
does not involve the question of due process — there seems to be 
no tribunal to decide the question. Even though one court 
holds an act unconstitutional on the ground that there has not 
been due process of law, another court may find that the ques- 
tion of constitutionality does not arise. 

Dean Lewis, very wisely it seems to me, regards the question 
as limited to amendments of the constitution. We often imag- 
ine that the constitution is at fault, when as a matter of fact 
the difficulty is with a decision or the framing of a bill. Re- 
cently the court of appeals of New York reversed a case on 
the ground that a certain statute was unconstitutional. A great 
deal of criticism was leveled at the decision. Another bill 
was drawn the following year which avoided the defects criti- 
cized by the court. It carried out every object that the original 
draftsman had in view, and also complied with the require- 
ments of the constitution. No constitutional amendment was 
needed, but merely intelligence arid skill on the part of the 
draftsman. Again, it was said the income tax was improperly 
held to be unconstitutional. The supreme court for many years 
held that an income-tax law was constitutional, but now a de- 
cision says that it is not. The fault is not with the constitution, 
and the original view held by the court for years may some- 
time be reaffirmed, and the desired result reached without any 
amendment. My belief is that the federal constitution owes its 
strength mainly to the fact that it is general and does not 
attempt particulars. It lays down general rules of conduct and 
then leaves the matter to Congress to work out in detail. From 
this characteristic comes its adaptability to changing conditions. 
Its provisions are fundamental. 
L '97) 



50 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

If you find that a bill is incorrectly drawn there can be no 
quicker process than to have it redrawn and submitted the next 
year. There seems to be no sound objection to such a course. 
We must educate the draftsmen of our bills, the thinkers among 
the public, and mainly our lawyers. That is why the present 
public discussions may be objectionable. They distract our at- 
tention from the real points of danger. I believe that many of 
our rules of law are wrong. I think we are living under a sys- 
tem adapted in some respects to a civilization existing three 
hundred years ago. It seems to me that some sweeping changes 
might well be made. Thus we might abolish our rules of evi- 
dence, which are simply rules of exclusion. So, too, we could 
modify the subject of contract, and, for example, do away with 
what seems to be the unnecessary and ha.mful doctrine of con- 
sideration. I would change many other branches of our law. 
Thus we know that our criminal procedure is at fault and that 
there are many technicalities which allow rascals to escape. 
There is a vast amount of traditional reverence for what was 
quite proper four or five hundred years ago, but is not so now. 
We know that many sound decisions shock common sense. Do 
not complain of these things, but get them changed by the leg- 
islature. 

Our study should be mainly directed towards a solution of 
these difficult questions. Once bring our law in accord with 
modern civilization and many of our troubles will cease. Let us 
devote ourselves to a study of existing conditions, and determine 
how best we can educate our people and lawyers, so that these 
problems may be scientifically and carefully worked out. We 
have a disease ; we do not want quack medicines, such as are 
often suggested for the evils that exist. If we go ahead trying 
all the various remedies, the result probably will be that the sit- 
uation will become far worse than it was before. We should be- 
come more patient. I do not believe that any thoughtful man 
would really want the restraints upon our impulses taken away. 
We speak of the people — we generally mean "other people" 
when we say " the people " — as acting thoughtlessly, but the ed- 
ucated man is just as likely to be carried away by the emotions 
of the moment ; anybody may feel the madness of the mob. 

(98) 



No. 2] THE RECALL OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS 5 i 

Therefore we all need checks. What these should be is a ques- 
tion requiring thought, but I believe this entire present-day- 
movement arises, not necessarily because the people are dissat- 
isfied with the power of the courts, ^not necessarily because they 
believe that the English system without written constitution 'is 
best for our people, but because they justly believe that there is 
something wrong. We should devote our energies to seeing 
-what is the real evil. 

We say the people in the long run are right, and that is so ; 
but we do not mean that they are necessarily right when they 
are carried away by excitement. No intelligent man wants a 
decision to rest on such a foundation. We must protect our- 
selves against this result, but we should not be so conservative 
as to prevent any reformation. Let us bring about the desired 
changes in an orderly, sound, scientific manner. This is not an 
easy thing to do, and requires much thought. It demands pro- 
found study, and able, experienced, thoroughly trained lawyers 
should give their earnest thoughts to the task, thus saving the 
people and our profession, for the good of the people depends 
on keeping our profession sound. 

(99) 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF AMERICAN 
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 

MUNROE SMITH 
Professor of Comparative Jurisprudence, Columbia University 

AMERICAN public law is peculiar, if not unique, in the 
extent to which the powers of our representative legis- 
latures are restricted by written constitutions. Many 
of the existing restrictions are required by our federal form of 
government. The fact that the field of legislative action is 
divided between the federal Congress and the state legislatures 
has compelled us to limit, in one way or in another, the powers 
of both, either by indicating what they may do or by stating 
what they may not do. There are, however, other restrictions 
that are not required by the federal form of government. Our 
federal and state constitutions contain special prohibitions de- 
signed to prevent the misuse of legislative power. The most 
important of these special prohibitions are those which are de- 
signed to protect personal liberty and private property and to 
maintain a formal legal equality. 

Natural Rights 

These special prohibitions, introduced in our earliest and 
repeated in our latest constitutions, embody principles which 
had slowly taken form, in Europe, during a period of more 
than two thousand years. The interests which they protect 
had come to be known as " natural rights," and these natural 
rights were regarded as part of a body of " natural law." To 
this natural law many European theorists, from the period of the 
Stoics to the times of Locke and Rousseau, had ascribed a tran- 
scendent authority ; and some of them had claimed that laws es- 
tablished by human authority which were not in harmony with 
natural law were not, properly speaking, entitled to the name 
or to the force of law. In those instances, however, in which 

' Read at the meeting of the Academy of PoHtical Science, October 26, 1912. 

(100) 



AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LA W 



53 



the recognized political authorities could not be induced, by 
argument or by agitation, to change the positive law or its 
interpretation, no method had been discovered by which the 
law of nature could be made to prevail except that of revolu- 
tion. Our separate national life began in a revolution, justified 
by appeals to natural law ; and in our constitutions we have 
elevated a certain number of natural-law principles to the posi- 
tion of supreme positive law. 

The Judicial Power 

Our public law is unique, again, in the extent to which the 
interpretation and enforcement of constitutional restrictions 
upon legislation are entrusted to f.he judiciary. The ground 
upon which Hamilton and others based their assertion that this 
power belongs to the courts, at least in what are called " non- 
political " questions, involving private rights, remains unshaken. 
That a representative legislature of limited authority cannot 
validly act beyond the scope of its authority is self-evident. 
That, if it attempts to do this, its act is not law, and that it is 
the right and the duty of the courts, in deciding cases, to de- 
cide what is and what is not law, seemed to Hamilton and 
to Marshall equally evident. Although this theory, when first 
formulated, was disputed, and has often since been combated — 
although it has been strongly urged, in particular, that it ignores 
the distinction between a legislature whose power is coordinate 
with that of the court which undertakes to restrain it and a 
legislature whose power is subordinate — nevertheless this theory 
also has been accepted. The question has been settled in prac- 
tise. The judicial power rests upon a basis more solid than 
any written text : it rests upon our established constitutional 
custom. 

In the development of our constitutional custom, however, 
the judicial power has proved to be greater than was perhaps 
originally foreseen by its most far-seeing advocates. The pro- 
visions in our constitutions which prevent our legislatures from 
interference with private rights are brief in their wording and 
broad in their scope. Drawn, as we have seen, from the theory 
of natural rights, as formulated in the eighteenth century, they 

(loi) 



54 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

have much of the vagueness which has always characterized 
natural law. This law, as Hobbes long ago said, is, more than 
any other, in need of an interpreter. In confiding its interpreta- 
tion to the courts, we have enabled them to make much unwritten 
constitutional law. 

On the whole, the peculiar features of our constitutional sys- 
tem have stood the test of time. For more than a century, at 
any rate, and until recently, the system has worked fairly well 
in its proper field. When the courts have attempted or have 
been constrained to extend their control over matters essentially 
or mainly political, as the federal Supreme Court did in the 
Dred Scott case and in the legal-tender and income-tax cases, 
the results have been less satisfactory ; and in recent years the 
Supreme Court has acted wisely in avoiding the questions raised 
by the restriction of suffrage in the Southern States and by the 
adoption of the initiative and referendum in Oregon. Legal 
questions that are ultimately economic and social, rather than 
political, form, under our system, the proper domain of the 
judicial power; and it is in this domain that the system has 
worked satisfactorily. It is, however, possible that its satis- 
factory operation has been due, in large measure, to the per- 
sistence, until a recent period, of the economic and social con- 
ditions which prevailed when it was first established. For 
colonial and frontier life, for the settlement and development of 
a vast expanse of territory, free individual initiative and unre- 
strained social cooperation are of the highest value, and a mini- 
mum of legal restraint and governmental supervision is desir- 
able. It is a well-known fact that French and German colonies 
do not thrive to-day as English colonies have thriven ; and this 
is attributed by French and German writers to an unduly elab- 
orate system of governmental management and restraint — to 
what the Germans call das Assessore7it)nim. Apparently, how- 
ever, as this country has become settled, as its population has 
become denser and its economic system more complex, the 
restriction of governmental action and the extraordinary pro- 
tection accorded to private rights have become less satisfactory. 
There is a growing demand for legislation intended to establish 
a more equal liberty and a less mechanical equality — for what 

(102) 



No. 2] AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW § 5 

is called " social " legislation. It has been found that legislative 
measures of this sort have great difficulty in running the gaunt- 
let of the courts. The fact that some such measures have been 
pronounced unconstitutional has aroused popular dissatisfaction ; 
there have been many protests ; there is a popular agitation 
against the degree of control which our courts exercise over 
legislation. The situation is one that can no longer be met by 
exclusively legal reasoning: the issues are political. 

Popular Sovereignty 

When the federal constitution of 1787 was submitted to the 
conventions of the several states, Hamilton made an ingenious 
effort to reconcile the judicial coiitrol of legislation with the 
principle of popular sovereignty. His political argument has 
not worn so well as his legal reasoning. His theory that the 
courts, in refusing to give effect to an unconstitutional law, are 
simply giving effect to the intention of the sovereign, preferring 
the intention of the people to the intention of their agents, 
seemed more satisfactory at the time than it does to-day. It 
does not now fit all the facts. 

The Development of Our State Constitutions 

In the several states, indeed, the written constitutions are now 
more obviously the expression of the will of the people than 
they were in Hamilton's day. In his time, and later, state con- 
stitutions, like ordinary laws, were adopted by representative 
bodies. To-day it has become our practise to submit constitu- 
tional revisions and amendments to popular vote. At the same 
time, however, other changes have occurred that tend to modify 
the relation of the state courts to the state electorates, because 
they tend to efface, within the several states, the distinction be- 
tween constitutional law and ordinary law. 

In the first place, the field assigned to constitutional law, as 
contrasted with the ordinary law, has been greatly extended, until 
today the matters with which each is concerned have come to be 
largely identical. Like our federal constitution, our first state 
constitutions were frames of government and bills of rights. 
By successive amendments and revisions, our later state consti- 

(103) 



56 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

tutions have projected themselves more and more extensively 
over the fields of legislative procedure, criminal law and pro- 
cedure, private law and civil procedure. When a legislature has 
done something which, in the opinion of the people of the state, 
it ought not to have done, constitutional amendment has usually 
withdrawn from its competence the field of action in which it 
went astray. When a legislature has left undone something 
which, in the opinion of the people, it ought to have done, con- 
stitutional amendment has frequently dealt with the matter in 
the form of positive regulation. The popular dissatisfaction 
with representative legislatures has also expressed itself in con- 
stitutional amendments which permit legislatures to assemble 
but once in two years and limit the duration of their sessions. 

These changes, which have fettered and largely crippled the 
representative legislatures of our states, have brought in their 
train another important change. The direct popular action now 
required in many matters for the development of state law is 
assuming a new form. In addition to the process of constitu- 
tional amendment by referendum, we have now, in many of our 
states, a process of legislation by referendum, and to the legis- 
lative referendum some of these states have added the popular 
initiative. With this change, the distinction between constitu- 
tional law and ordinary law becomes even hazier. The exten- 
sion of constitutional law^ over the field of ordinary law had 
already largely effaced the distinction between the two bodies of 
law as regards the matters with which they respectively deal. 
The development of direct popular legislation wholly effaces the 
distinction between constitutional law and ordinary law as re- 
gards the source from which they respectively emanate. The 
only distinction that remains is procedural. If a measure be 
submitted to and approved by the electorate in the manner pre- 
scribed for amendment of the constitution, it becomes part of 
the superior constitutional law. If it be submitted and ap- 
proved in the manner prescribed for direct legislation, it be- 
comes part of the inferior ordinary law. If the methods of 
submission and approval are substantially the same in both 
cases, the distinction is purely nominal : a measure that is de- 
scribed, in its title, as an amendment to the constitution is con- 
stitutional law ; a measure not so described is ordinary law. 

(104) 



No. 2] AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 57 

Under these conditions, Hamilton's political reasoning is on 
longer applicable. If a state adopts by popular vote a measure 
that is not described as an amendment to the constitution, and 
if the state judiciary declares this measure unconstitutional, the 
court is not preferring the intention of the people to the inten- 
tion of their agents; it is preferring the earlier intention of 
the people to their later intention, their forethought to their 
afterthought. 

When we consider the constant and irresistible action of 
political facts upon formal law, it is a serious question whether 
the distinction which is still drawn in our states between consti- 
tutional amendment and direct legislation can long be main- 
tained. From the point of view of the popular-sovereignty 
theory, it is quite illogical that the courts should have power to 
declare direct legislation unconstitutional. This may well be 
regarded as an argument against direct legislation ; but we have 
not now to consider whether this form of legislation is or is not 
desirable. It exists and it is spreading; it is, accordingly a 
political fact; and what we must take into account is the effect 
of this fact upon our political theory and practise. 

The ''Recall of Decisions'' 

That the formal distinction between the constitutional law 
and the ordinary law of our states is tending to break down and 
disappear is drastically illustrated by a proposal that has at- 
tracted much attention during the past few months, the mis- 
called " recall of decisions." The proposal is that a law which 
has been pronounced unconstitutional by the highest court of a 
state, on the ground that it is in conflict with the state constitu- 
tion, shall, on popular initiative, be submitted to popular vote, 
and, if approved by the electorate, shall become law. 

This proposal is a wholly natural and absolutely logical pro- 
duct of the " people's rule " movement. Moreover, however 
little Hamilton would have liked to see his own artillery turned 
against his own political intrenchments, the proposal is logically 
consistent with the popular-sovereignty theory which he em- 
ployed in defense of the judicial power. If, in pronouncing a 
law unconstitutional, the judiciary represents and acts for the 

(105) 



58 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

people, preferring their intention to that of their legislative 
agents, it is not easy to show why the intention of the people, 
directly declared, is not to be preferred to that of their judicial 
agents. If, on referendum, the voters of the state may disallow 
the act of one set of agents, it is difficult to see why they may 
not similarly disallow the act of another set of agents. 

It is said, in reply, that a judicial interpretation of law is a 
different thing from an act of legislation. From the popular- 
sovereignty point of view, however, the difference is immaterial : 
the interpretation of constitutional law by a court and the act 
passed by a representative legislature are, each of them, at- 
tempts of agents of the people to express the intention of the 
people. And in fact the distinction between legislation and ju- 
dicial decision is largely a formal one. Every authoritative in- 
terpretation of written law establishes a rule of law; and, if the 
law to be interpreted be general in its terms, interpretation may 
make a great many rules of law. This fact is recognized in our 
legal theory: the Supreme Court of the United States has more 
than once invalidated a judicial decision rendered by the highest 
court of a state, on the ground that a state may not make " a 
law " impairing the obligation of contract. 

Recognition, however, that a proposal is logically consistent 
with accepted political theory has never been regarded by any 
English-speaking people as a sufficient reason for adopting it. 
When a change in political practise is proposed, such a people 
always inquires, first, whether any change is necessary; second, 
how the proposed change is likely to work. 

The first of the questions is answered by the opponents of 
the " recall " proposal, by pointing out that in most of our 
states it is easy to amend the constitution. In some of our 
states such an amendment may be proposed either by the legis- 
lature or by a small minority of voters, and may be adopted, 
with little delay, by a majority of those who vote on the pro- 
posal. If in other states the process of amendment is unduly 
difficult or protracted, the obvious and sufficient remedy is to 
change the process. On the other hand, the advocates of the 
" recall " proposal insist that the ordinary process of amend- 
ment has unnecessary and undesirable results which the " recall " 

io6) 



No. 2] AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 59 

avoids. This contention was first clearly and intelligibly pre- 
sented by Dean Lewis of the University of Pennsylvania Law 
School. He maintains that the " recall " is not only a more 
efficient instrument for adapting written constitutions to chang- 
ing economic and social conditions, but that it preserves the 
judicial control over unconstitutional legislation which the ordin- 
ary form of amendment tends to impair. This last assertion 
seems to me to be true. 

The question how the " recall " will work in other respects — 
the question, in particular, of its immediate practical results as 
distinguished from its ultimate theoretical results — has been 
little discussed. In endeavoring to indicate how it will prob- 
ably work, we must, of course, take the proposal as it is now 
formulated. It is obviously impossible to consider how all other 
conceivable proposals of a similar general character might 
operate. 

The constitutional restriction upon legislation which has at- 
tracted most attention during the past few years, and which has 
elicited most discussion during the past few months, is found in 
provisions requiring legislative measures to conform to " due 
process of law." And, inasmuch as it has long been recognized 
by our courts that due-process restrictions may cease to be ap- 
plicable and operative when legislative action is taken under the 
" police power," this power also has been much discussed. The 
discussion has not turned upon the proper meaning of due 
process or upon the extent of the police power. The question 
is : how the interpretation which the courts give to these ex- 
pressions is to be controlled ; how the people are to exercise a 
power to determine, in last instance, what their constitutional 
law shall be. 

As the "recall" proposal was originally presented by Mr. 
Roosevelt, the referendum on decisions was not, apparently, to 
be limited to due-process cases; it was to be available whenever 
a state law was declared to be invalid because in conflict with 
any provision of the state constitution. In view, however, of the 
inconvenient and even absurd results that might possibly be pro- 
duced by an unlimited " recall," it is now proposed that refer- 
enda on decisions shall be limited to due-process cases. The 

(107) 



6o EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

proposal is so formulated, for example, by Mr. William L. 
Ransom in his recent book on Majority Rule and the Judiciaryy 
to which Mr. Roosevelt contributes an introduction. 

In order that we may see how this limited "recall" would 
probably work, let us take a situation which has already been 
much discussed, which has been frequently chosen by the ad- 
vocates of the "recall" to illustrate the need of a new remedy, 
and which Mr. Ransom claims would be remedied by a " recall " 
limited to due-process cases. Let us take the situation which 
exists in New York as regards compensation of workmen, or of 
their widows and children, in cases of injury or death caused by 
industrial accidents. A law passed by the state legislature was 
pronounced unconstitutional by the Court of Appeals, because 
it proposed to take the money of the employers without due 
process and was not within the sphere of the police power. It 
is claimed that a " recall " limited to due-process cases would 
have sufficed to validate the law and make it immediately 
effective. But, in pronouncing this law unconstitutional, the 
New York Court of Appeals declared that, for the purpose of 
reaching a decision, it was not necessary for the court to deter- 
mine whether the act was unconstitutional solely as denying due 
process. It declined, in particular, to decide whether it was 
unconstitutional as denying the employers' right to trial by jury. 
It seems clear, therefore, that even if the decision of the court 
had been " recalled," the law would have been validated only 
so far as due process was concerned, and that the question which 
the Court of Appeals declined to decide would remain open. 
If, when this issue was raised, the Court of Appeals should 
again declare the law unconstitutional, it would apparently be 
necessary, under the limited-recall program, to introduce a new 
amendment to the constitution, widening the scope of the recall, 
and to institute a new referendum. If the new amendment 
were limited in its application to the matter of jury trial, it is 
not impossible that question might arise whether the law was not 
in conflict with some other provision of the constitution, or with 
the general spirit of the constitution. 

So numerous are the grounds upon which any law that at- 
tempts to realize what is to-day described as "social justice" 

(io8) 



No. 2] AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 6 1 

may conceivably be pronounced unconstitutional, that it will be 
no easy task to frame a recall amendment that will cover all 
these grounds and yet remain limited in its scope. It seems 
doubtful, to put it mildly, whether any recall proposal thus far 
formulated promises to secure a more speedy adaptation of our 
state constitutions to changing conditions than the existing 
process of substantive amendment. It seems highly improb- 
able that it will bring to a more prompt and satisfactory con- 
clusion any differences of opinion or of sentiment between the 
state courts and the state electorates. For a single political 
battle, terminated by a single substantive amendment, the 
limited " recall " appears to substitute, primarily at least, a 
prolonged political war, in which the electorate would realize 
its intention only after several campaigns. Moreover, after 
each campaign, the limited recall would be widened in its opera- 
tion ; and it would thus gradually approach that unlimited 
recall which the supporters of the plan do not at present 
advocate. 

A more fundamental objection, which applies to any con- 
ceivable form of referendum on laws pronounced unconstitu- 
tional, is that it offers us a crude and unsatisfactory means 
of obtaining the end desired. The purpose of the proposed 
referendum is to obtain, particularly in matters of natural right, 
popular expressions of the sense of social justice. Such ex- 
pressions are to create precedents which the state courts are to 
follow. It is, however, extremely improbable that the elector- 
ate will consciously attempt to express its sense of social 
justice. The great majority of the voters will express their 
varying judgments as to the probable effects, good or bad, 
of the particular measure submitted to them. If it be replied 
that the majority judgment will contain, by implication, an 
expression of its prevailing sense of justice, it may be remarked 
that implications are matters of opinion, and that widely differ- 
ent implications may be discovered in every such popular 
decision. After every general election there appear widely 
different theories as to what was really " the verdict of the 
people." It may be added that successive referenda on differ- 
ent measures may well contain implications that cannot easily 

(109) 



62 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

be reconciled. The difficulty which the courts now experience 
in determining the true reasons for their own decisions on con- 
stitutional questions will appear slight indeed in comparison 
with the difficulty which they will encounter if they be called 
upon to determine, first, what intuitions of social justice seem 
to be implied in a series of popular decisions, and, second,, 
what rules of constitutional interpretation can be formulated 
that will express these intuitions. To the average lawyer such 
a process of developing law seems fantastic : hence the gener- 
ally hostile reaction of the legal profession to the "recall" 
proposal. To the student of legal history, on the other hand^ 
the process is not fantastic but familiar. It was by this very 
process — the expert interpretation of popular decisions — that 
law was taking form in the Mediterranean city-states twenty-five 
centuries ago and again among the Teutons fifteen centuries 
ago. If the reaction of the legal historian to the proposal 
is also hostile, it is not because the process seems novel but be- 
cause it is seen to be archaic. Like the whole direct-govern- 
ment movement, of which it is a product, it is a reversion to the 
primitive processes of early civilization. 

The Development of the Federal Constitution 

Closely connected with the problem of adapting our state 
constitutions to changing social and economic conditions is the 
problem of the development of our federal constitutional law. 
The due-process requirement and other restrictions found in 
our state constitutions are contained in the federal constitution 
also ; and a state court may declare an act of a state legislature 
invalid because it is in conflict with the supreme organic law of 
the nation as well as with the constitution of the state. The 
New York Workmen's Compensation Act, for example, was 
declared to be in conflict with the federal as well as the state 
constitution ; and it would apparently remain invalid even if 
the due-process clause of the state constitution were amended 
or overridden. This being the case, it seems singular that 
at present there should be so much discussion of means of 
developing our state constitutions and so little discussion of the 
possibility of developing the federal constitution. 

(no) 



No. 2] AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 63 

The explanation is, of course, that during the last few years 
the attitude of the federal Supreme Court toward social-reform 
legislation has been more friendly, or at least more tolerant, 
than that of some of our state courts. At Washington the 
judicial interpretation of due process has come to be less purely 
historical than at some of our state capitals, and a somewhat 
wider scope has been attributed to the police power. 

When the highest court of a state has declared a law invalid, 
because in conflict with the federal constitution, there is at 
present no possibility of appeal to the federal Supreme Court. 
Appeal can be taken only when the law is declared to be con- 
stitutional. This rule, however, is statutory ; it is contained in 
the federal Judiciary Act. For the present, accordingly, the 
effort of those who desire to promote social-reform legislation 
is very properly concentrated on the proposal so to amend the 
Judiciary Act that all cases involving a question of federal con- 
stitutional law may be carried to the federal Supreme Court. 
Such a change, coupled with substantive amendment of the 
state constitution or with the adoption of the " recall of de- 
cisions" in the several states, will doubtless, as things stand, 
make the course of social-reform legislation run much more 
smoothly. If appeal lies to the Supreme Court, the state 
courts, in their interpretation of the federal constitution, will 
follow more closely the decisions of the federal judiciary ; and 
it will be increasingly difficult for them to maintain divergent 
interpretations of similar provisions in the state constitutions. 

For the present, then, this opportunist program seems to 
meet the situation. It should, however, be remembered that, 
while the attitude of the federal Supreme Court is at present 
satisfactory to friends of social-reform legislation, this has not 
always been the case. It was not the case a few years ago, 
when the Supreme Court decided by a bare majority (five to 
four) that the New York legislature could not limit the hours of 
adult male labor in bakeries. At that time the United States 
Supreme Court was subjected to nearly as much criticism as 
has since been directed against the New York Court of Appeals. 
The subsequent change observable in the attitude of the Su- 
preme Court is coincident with an unusually rapid change in its 

(III) 



64 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

membership; and the appointments which have so largely 
changed its membership were made during the period in which 
there was widespread criticism of its conservative position. 
There is no conclusive reason to assume that this court may not 
again, at some future time, become at least as conservative as 
the majority of the state courts. 

The problem of adapting our federal constitution to changing 
economic and social conditions, although for the moment rele- 
gated to the background of political discussion, will in the long 
run be recognized as far more important than the problem of 
constitutional amendment in the several states. Its solution is 
far more difficult. Formal amendment of the federal constitu- 
tion is almost impossible. During the last hundred years no 
amendments have been adopted except those that followed and 
sealed the victory of the national forces in the Civil War. If, 
as now seems probable, the pending income-tax amendment be 
adopted, it must be remembered that this proposal has come 
before the country under exceptionally favorable auspices. Pro- 
posed by a Republican President, approved by the Senate unani- 
mously and opposed in the House of Representatives by only 
fourteen members, it has the further advantage of presenting 
itself, not as an innovation, but as a restoration. It accords to 
Congress a power which that body has previously exercised with 
the approval of the Supreme Court, and of which it has been de- 
prived only because that court has reversed itself. The failure of 
this amendment, indeed, would go far to prove that formal 
change of the federal constitution is at present impossible, but 
its adoption should not unduly elate those who desire further 
amendments. The absurdity of the existing process of amend- 
ment is best illustrated by the fact that thirteen states contain- 
ing less than 5 per cent of the total state population could de- 
feat an amendment supported by thirty states containing about 
95 per cent of the total state population. Under such a pro- 
cess, amendment of the federal constitution is possible only by 
what is practically almost unanimous consent. And even where 
consent is so general as to be almost unanimous, the process is 
exceedingly slow, as is shown by the fact that the income-tax 
amendment was submitted to the state legislatures three and a 

(112) 



No. 2] AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 65 

half years ago and has received but thirty-four of the thirty- 
six state votes required. 

The difficulty of formal amendment has forced us to develop 
our federal constitution largely by interpretation ; and as, in all 
matters not of a strictly political character, the power of final 
interpretation has been accorded to the judiciary, the greater 
part of our unwritten constitutional law is found in the federal 
law reports. So great is the power of interpretation to make law, 
especially when the text to be interpreted is so concise as is that 
of the federal constitution, and so freely has the Supreme Court 
made use of this power, that to many students it seems that 
formal amendment is unnecessary. To many, however, it seems 
doubtful whether our federal constitution meets all the needs of 
the existing generation, and few will be so bold as to affirm 
that it can be adapted without formal amendment to meet all the 
needs of the generations yet to be born. And if a point is 
reached at which the constitution cannot be bent by the economic 
and other social forces which it already checks, there is danger 
that it will be broken. 

Here, again, Hamilton's defense of the judicial power has be- 
come unsatisfactory. The greater part of the written constitu- 
tion took form one hundred and twenty-five years ago ; its most 
recent provisions were adopted nearly half a century ago ; and 
when the Supreme Court declares a law invalid because in con- 
flict with the constitution, it is not preferring the intention of 
the people of the United States to that of their agents ; it is 
preferring the intention of the dead to that of the living. To 
infer any real consent of the living from their acquiescence, 
when change is almost impossible except by revolution, is to 
employ a legal fiction. 

It is not yet formally proposed to apply a popular" recall " to 
the decisions of the federal judiciary; but there have been sug- 
gestions that, if the system should be introduced and should ap- 
prove itself in the several states, it might be extended to the 
nation. The chief difficulty which will be encountered by any- 
one who endeavors to formulate a proposal for the submission 
of constitutional questions to the people of the United States is 
that, in public law, the people means the electorate, and that 

5 ("3) 



66 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

there is no national electorate. Nor can the forty-eight state 
electorates fitly be recognized for any purpose whatever as 
a national electorate. The conditions on which the different 
states grant the right to vote are so diverse that a popular 
majority obtained in a nation-wide vote would neither de- 
serve nor receive serious consideration. Such a majority might 
possibly be due to the fact that in nine or ten states the total 
vote, and consequently the majorities recorded, were doubled 
by woman suffrage. It might be due to the fact that negroes, 
who vote freely in the northern and western states, are prac- 
tically excluded from the suffrage in the southern states. To the 
total affirmative and negative votes of these forty-eight elec- 
torates no legal significance could reasonably be attached unless 
the conditions of voting were equalized. A " recall " of the 
decisions of the federal judiciary could, of course, be legalized 
only by constitutional amendment. Unless such a proposal car- 
ried with it the further proposal that Congress be empowered 
to determine who should vote, it would assuredly be rejected 
because of its absurdity. If it carried with such a further pro- 
posal, it would probably be rejected by the votes of the south- 
ern states alone, even if the rest of the country favored it. For 
these reasons, if there were no others, the " recall" of federal 
judicial decisions must be regarded as a matter of speculative in- 
terest only. For the present, at least, it is not in the realm of 
practical politics. 

There remains the question whether the federal constitution 
cannot be made more adaptable to social changes by changing 
the process of amendment. Here, in my opinion, we reach the 
heart of the question that is before us. The amending clause 
of the federal constitution can be amended by the vote of three- 
fourths of the states. A new and less difficult method of amend- 
ment, if thus legalized, would make it possible to change by 
orderly and constitutional process any provision of the existing 
constitution except that which assures to all the states equal 
representation in the federal Senate. The different plans which 
have been proposed for amendment of the amending clause in 
the federal constitution are so fully discussed in Mr. Thompson's 
paper that they need not here be noted. By the adoption of 

(114) 



No. 2] AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 6/ 

any of these plans the constitutional situation would be radically 
improved. To Senator LaFollette's plan there is, however, one 
serious objection. Starting with the sound idea that a majority 
of states is required by the federal »principle and a popular ma- 
jority by the democratic principle, he proposes to recognize the 
forty-eight state electorates as a national electorate, and to treat 
a majority resulting from the combination of the heterogeneous 
votes cast in the forty-eight states as a true popular majority. 
The objections to such a procedure have already been stated. 

Conflicting Legal Theories 

There is, as the political debates of the past year have 
shown, a large and respectable body of American citizens who 
deny the necessity of adapting our written constitution to 
changing economic and social conditions. They are satisfied 
with our present organic laws. They are particularly averse to 
qualifying, in any manner, the protection which our written 
constitutions give to personal liberty and to private property. 
They are equally averse to impairing the formal legal equality 
of all persons which these instruments safeguard. They not only 
object to any formal change in what Professor Burgess has 
described as " the constitutional organization of liberty," but 
they dislike any modification of the existing organization by 
re-interpretation of the old formulas. 

Men of this way of thinking are especially numerous in the 
legal profession. The ordinary lawyer is mainly concerned 
with the protection of private rights, and in helping to protect 
them he renders valuable service to society as well as to his 
clients. General social interests are less obvious to him : they 
are in the background of his daily life and thought; private 
rights are in the foreground. 

Most of these persons, whether lawyers or laymen, are in 
reality adherents of the school of natural law. The lawyer who 
has read his Hobbes or his Austin may assent, intellectually, to 
the doctrine that law is the expression of the will of the political 
sovereign ; the lawyer who knows his Maine or his Holmes may 
similarly assent to the theory that law is a historical product; 
the one may call himself an analytical, the other a historical 

(lis) 



68 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

jurist ; but if either feels that there are legal principles which 
the sovereign cannot modify and which historical development 
merely exhibits, he is really a disciple of the natural-law school. 
Similarly, many laymen, who know nothing of the wranglings 
of the philosophical schools, are instinctively adherents of the 
school of natural law, although they might be as much sur- 
prised to hear this as was Moliere's M. Jourdain when he 
discovered that he had unwittingly talked prose all his life. 

Between such persons, and those who believe that law is 
a social instrument which men deliberately fashion to serve 
their purposes, or those who believe that it is a product of the 
entire social life and must needs change with changing social 
conditions, discussion is difficult. 

It may be an irenic suggestion to say that each of these 
philosophical theories has in it a core of truth, but that, as none 
is wholly false, so none embodies the whole truth. There are 
conditions of social life and progress which are so essential that 
no legal system can disregard them, without imperiling the 
welfare and possibly the existence of the society which it 
governs. These conditions may be described as determined 
by nature. As far as they fit into the framework of law and 
are capable of statement as legal principles, they are appropri- 
ately described as natural law. Again : the cooperation on 
which human society is based is not mechanical, like that of 
the ant-hill ; it is a cooperation of free individuals whose per- 
sonality is not wholly merged in any group and whose interests 
are indeed subordinated but not sacrificed to group interests. 
The human type of cooperation is one that leaves room for 
competition; and social progress is largely the result of 
limited competition. The protection of human personality 
and of individual interests, the staking-off of fields of free 
competition — these are necessary conditions of social life 
among men, and they find expression in the so-called natural 
rights of the human being. On the other hand, the precise 
adjustment of social and individual interests is not, as far 
as we can see, determined by nature. It is determined in 
large measure by the historical development of societies ; it 
changes, and apparently must change, as social conditions are 
modified. It is also determined, to a considerable degree, by 

(ii6) 



No. 2] AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LA W 69 

the human will. And when the conditions of social life and 
progress and the adjustment of social and individual interests 
are to be expressed in written laws and constitutions, the human 
will has complete freedom. The content of legal rules may be 
determined by nature or by history ; their form is determined 
by human authority. It may then be conceded that, in a very 
real sense, there is natural law and there are natural rights. It 
does not follow, however, that any statement of this law or any 
formulation of these rights can be eternally valid. All such 
statements and formulations require continuous evolutive inter- 
pretation ; and from time to time there will be need of restate- 
ments and reformulations. 

(117) 



5 • 



DISCUSSION OF THE ADAPTATION OF WRITTEN 

CONSTITUTIONS TO CHANGING ECONOMIC 

AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS' 

HENRY ROGERS SEAGER 
Professor of Political Economy, Columbia University 

AS an advocate of labor laws, some of which have been 
held unconstitutional, I might be expected to dissent 
from Professor Goodnow's conclusions. Instead, my 
experience and observation, not, of course, as a constitutional 
lawyer, but merely as a student of labor legislation, cause me to 
agree with every important position he has taken. I believe, 
as he does, that judicial interpretation can and will adapt our 
federal constitution to our changing economic and social condi- 
tions. There is nothing in that instrument, as he has shown, 
which expressly bars the way to a thorough-going program of 
social and labor legislation. Where the way has been barred 
by decisions of the Supreme Court, as in the reactionary 
decision holding the ten-hour bake-shop law of this state 
unconstitutional, the cause has clearly been not in the constitu- 
tion, but in the personal opinions and prejudices of the judges 
called on to interpret the constitution. To prove this conten- 
tion it is necessary only to recall that in the case referred 
to four out of the nine judges, quite as able and learned-in-the- 
law as their colleagues, took an exactly opposite view of the 
meaning of the constitution. Moreover, it was a reflection on 
the intelligence of the American people to ask them to believe 
that their fundamental law, which had been held a few years 
before to permit the state of Utah to prohibit the employment 
of men in underground mines and smelters for more than eight 
hours a day, would not permit the state of New York to pro- 
hibit their employment in bakeries for more than ten hours 
a day. In all decisions involving the scope of the police power, 

'At the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 26, 1912. 

(118) 



CONSTITUTIONS AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS 71 

that is, the question as to how far the liberty of the individual 
may be curbed to promote the larger social interests of the 
community, we are clearly in the domain of fallible and chang- 
ing opinion. Judicial opinion is only one segment — a con- 
servative segment, no doubt — of general public opinion. As 
public opinion is aroused to industrial evils and voices itself in 
legislation regulating labor and other social conditions, judicial 
opinion will respond. In only a few instances, and then by 
bare-majority decisions certain to be subsequently reversed, has 
the Supreme Court of the United States refused to uphold 
measures consonant with the prevailing morality and the gener- 
ally accepted opinion of the day. 

While I agree with Professor Goodnow's conclusions, I should 
emphasize even more strongly than he has done the importance 
of the changes in our legal system which are necessary to make 
the process of adaptation by judicial interpretation work freely 
and easily. With the fourteenth amendment to the federal 
constitution given the broad scope which it now has, I should 
like to see the bills of rights amended out of the state constitu- 
tions all together. Private rights do not require the double 
constitutional protection which they now enjoy. The only im- 
portant result of it is that labor and other laws which have good 
prospect of being upheld by the federal Supreme Court are 
often declared unconstitutional by the less able and less pro- 
gressive state courts of last resort. If this proposal seems to 
go too far, certainly there can be no valid objection to making 
the machinery for amending a state constitution so simple and 
so ready in its operation that measures like the workmen's com- 
pensation act which was held unconstitutional by our court 
of appeals and which have public opinion overwhelmingly 
behind them, can be within a reasonable period expressly 
authorized by constitutional amendment- 

The necessary corollary to machinery for the easy amend- 
ment of state constitutions is the other measure of which 
Professor Goodnow spoke, a federal statute permitting appeal 
to the federal courts whenever the interpretation of the consti- 
tution of the United States is the issue on which a decision 
turns. That appeal may be taken from decisions upholding 

(119) 



72 



EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 



Statutes and not from decisions declaring statutes unconstitu- 
tional is an anomaly in our present system which history may 
explain but which logic can not defend. 

With state constitutions that may be easily amended and the 
right to appeal to the federal Supreme Court whenever there is 
a question as to what the federal constitution permits or does 
not permit, I believe we should be able to enjoy all of the ad- 
vantages which come from written constitutions and at the same 
time largely escape the disadvantages, of which we have been 
made so conscious in the last few years, 

(120) 



DISCUSSION OF WRITTEN CONSTITUTIONS AND 
SOCIAL CONDITIONS 

MILES M. DAWSON 
New York City 

IT is singular that among the various proposals to reform and 
improve methods of legislation the adoption, with appro- 
priate alterations, of the republican government plan long 
in use in Great Britain, her dependencies and other countries, 
has not been more frequently advocated. 

The cause is, seemingly, that our written constitutions in state 
and nation do not lend themselves readily to insensible, gradual 
modification, and when they were adopted, responsible govern- 
ment had not so far developed, even in Great Britain, that its 
true nature was comprehended. 

Even at this day, while the parliamentary government of 
Great Britain is well understood by students of governmental 
theories, it is not understood by the mass of our population, 
though such a system has been in use for many years in Canada 
and its superiority is the boast of all Canadians. We are too 
prone to assume that responsibility of government to the voters 
prevails so generally that Americans must have understood and 
deliberately discarded it. Such is by no means the case. 

Scarcely half the countries of Europe enjoy parliamentary 
government with a responsible ministry. The Norwegians 
separated from Sweden to obtain it. In Sweden and in Den- 
mark, the voters are still struggling without success to wrest 
from the crown the right to hold the ministry responsible. 
Finland enjoyed this right till recently. In Germany, Austria, 
Russia, and other countries, responsible parliamentary govern- 
ment does not exist. 

Except in the United States, however, it is found wherever 
free government exists ; without excepting the United States, 
it may be said that it is found in every country where govern- 
ment is not frequently a failure, in failing to execute the policies 

(121) 



74 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

approved at the polls. Witness the complete breakdown of 
successive administrations at Washington and in our largest 
and most important commonwealths. It is not unusual to have 
the President or governor, with the veto power, at loggerheads 
with one or both houses of the legislature. As a result, there 
is little legislation — virtually none — which the people have 
passed upon at the polls and approved by putting in power 
that party which promised to enact it. Not only do we see a 
political party opposed to the executive in control frequently 
of one or both legislative chambers, but even when one party is 
in complete control of the government, it has so little sense of 
its responsibility to carry out its promises, that not infrequently 
the administration goes to pieces. Moreover, when this occurs, 
although at the commencement of an administration, the 
country must patiently await its end before it can change these 
conditions, and experience has shown that usually it exchanges 
one mechanism which will not work for another no better. 

So intolerable has this become that a President or a governor 
of strong views and powerful character must declare his own 
policies and force them on a reluctant legislature under a pres- 
sure somewhat similar to the dissolution of parliament where 
responsible government exists, viz., by a threat to appeal to the 
people, that is, to attack the legislators in their home districts 
before and after nomination, if necessary. This is certainly 
an awkward substitute for responsible government, in which 
the party and its leaders are held accountable without intro- 
ducing anything foreign to the scheme of legislative govern- 
ment, such as executive interference which, however necessary, 
is rightly regarded as tyrannical. 

Moreover such a plan is not practicable unless the executive 
has policies which he is determined to carry out, and the power 
to make an appeal to the people effective. Under responsible 
government, such a man becomes the leader of his party — 
the head of the cabinet when it is in power — and would retain 
his position so long as he retained popular support. Under 
the substitute for such responsible government which necessity 
caused Roosevelt, Hughes and LaFollette to introduce, we are 
compelled, in order to continue their effective leadership, either 

(122) 



No. 2] CONSTITUTIONS AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS 75 

to keep them in executive office indefinitely, or permit them to 
assume the r61e of poHtical bosses when not in office ; or in such 
an office as United States senator, which has nothing to do with 
state legislation, to have them dominate state policies by threat- 
ening to appeal from the legislators to their constituents. In 
brief, conditions are so complex, inarticulate and dissociated 
that this can scarcely be called a legislative mechanism, but 
merely the triumph of some powerful personality, a triumph 
achieved despite the want of machinery through which the 
leader's proposals may be given effect by the voter's approval. 

It would be well if responsible government were tried in one 
of the more advanced states. It would solve our legislative 
problem if this could be brought about in the near future, so 
that, for instance, Roosevelt's wonderful qualities of leadership 
could be utilized to the full and his policies carried into effect if 
approved by the voters without the necessity that he remain 
President or that another man as President be compelled to 
pursue the legislative policy of a party leader out of office. It 
is a good rule which causes American voters to hesitate to con- 
fide the executive power too frequently to one man. But 
where responsible government exists, the head of the state is 
virtually powerless, except as an administrator with executive 
powers only ; the legislative power includes the legislative 
policy of the administration, and all matters that require the 
consent of the legislature are entrusted to a cabinet, which must 
hold its confidence and retain its support or retire from office, 
or else dissolve the legislature and appeal to the people. 
Under such conditions, liberty is best conserved by continuing 
a leader in power so long as his leadership exists, instead of 
jealously guarding against his too long continuance, as is 
considered necessary if he is at the same time chief executive. 

The solution of our governmental problems would be easier, 
could we keep at the front the strongest, wisest and best men 
throughout their entire lifetime, like Gladstone in Great Britain, 
instead of ending their influence upon legislation with their 
retirement from executive office. We not only waste the 
powers of our most serviceable citizens, but permit the com- 
plete breakdown at times of our legislative system as a means 
of carrying into effect the policies approved by the voters. 

(123) 



THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE METHODS OF 
SELECTING AND REMOVING JUDGES' 

HARLAN F. STONE 
Dean of the Law School of Columbia University 

WHEN our judicial system was established in the United 
States, two of its features were peculiarly adapted to 
its separation from political influence and activity. 
The general policy adopted in all of the states down to 1812 of 
appointing all judicial officers with life tenure of office was cal- 
culated to remove the selection of judges from political control 
and from the influences of the strife and passions of political 
campaigns. Their appointment for life or during good be- 
havior removed the temptation to seek a new election or ap- 
pointment as a reward for political or party service. 

The other feature of our judicial system which has tended 
hitherto to keep the American judge from the political arena 
has been the fact that in the exercise of his power to interpret 
statutes or to declare statutes unconstitutional, he judges the law 
only in order to judge a case involving the rights of individuals. 
He does not appear in the role of an assailant of the law, nor, 
on the other hand, is his professional conduct as a magistrate in 
determining the law made even indirectly the occasion of reward 
or punishment by the electorate. As De Tocqueville stated in 
commenting on this fact: 

It will be readily understood that by connecting the censorship of the 
laws with the private interests of members of the community, and by 
ultimately uniting the prosecution of the law with the prosecution of an 
individual, legislation is protected from wanton assaults and from the 
daily aggressions of party spirit. 

He might well have added that the judicial interpretation of laws 

' Introductory address as presiding officer at the meeting of the Academy of Polit- 
ical Science, October 25, 1912. 

^124) 



SELECTING AND REMOVING JUDGES 



77 



and the constitution was likewise protected by our judicial 
scheme from the direct political attacks of parties or factions. 

The system of appointment of judges for life or during good 
behavior has long since been abandoned in most of our states. 
Influenced undoubtedly by the democratic tendencies which 
swept over the country in the first half of the eighteenth cen- 
tury, Georgia first, in 1 8 12, in the case of its inferior judges, 
and Mississippi in 1832 provided for popular election of judges 
for limited terms. This method of selecting judges was rapidly 
adopted by other states, until at the present time I believe the 
only states retaining the appointive system are Delaware, Mas- 
sachusetts and New Jersey. By this radical change in our 
polity the judicial office was cast into the arena of party politics 
and became potentially at least subject to influences which are 
wholly inconsistent with that sense of security and freedom 
which the founders of our government deemed essential to 
judicial integrity and efficiency. It is perhaps not within my 
province as the presiding officer of this meeting to attempt to 
comment upon the merits of the prevailing methods of selecting 
judges, but it may be permitted to me to say in passing that if 
there is any substantial basis for the current criticisms of our 
judges, the system of electing judges for limited terms has not 
been justified by its results. On the other hand, if our judges 
the country over were as distinguished for their learning and 
integrity as are the judges of Delaware, Massachusetts and New 
Jersey, where the appointive system still exists, there would be 
little occasion for the serious agitation over and discussion of 
our judicial system which now prevails. These are significant 
facts, which should arrest our attention at the very outset of our 
search for new methods of subjecting our judges to the control 
of the popular will. I therefore venture to express the hope 
that the papers and discussions to which we shall have the 
pleasure of listening this afternoon will turn the light of search- 
ing inquiry upon our existing method of selecting judges. With 
political, as with physical ills, the removal of the cause is likely 
to prove more efficacious than the application of remedies, 
especially if they are new and untried. It is to my mind a 
singular and noteworthy fact that this consideration has hitherto 

(125) 



78 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

played comparatively little part in the various aspects of the 
public discussion of our judicial system, and it is therefore 
especially gratifying to note that the first paper of the afternoon 
will be devoted to an examination of our system of appointing 
judges. 

The censorship of laws, through the determination of the 
rights of individuals, with the consequent detachment, in prac- 
tise, at least, of our judges from direct assaults upon or defense 
of our laws, has continued to be the method of squaring our 
legislation with the mandates of our constitutions, state and na- 
tional. This device was believed by the founders of our political 
system to be, and has until recently been praised by political 
philosophers and writers as being the most powerful barrier yet 
devised against the tyranny of political assemblies and of pop- 
ular majorities. Changing times and changing conditions have^ 
however, brought change in opinion, certainly with a very con- 
siderable number of our political thinkers, and it is now insist- 
ently urged that the judicial interpretation of laws and constitu- 
tional provisions which some members of the community believe 
to interfere with social progress should be modified by subjecting 
the judicial function to popular control through the devices of 
recall of judicial decisions and recall of judges. 

The recall of decisions, as it has been defined by ex-President 
Roosevelt, its most prominent advocate, as will doubtless be 
made to appear by the discussions at these meetings, is in its 
essence a form of constitutional amendment, and in practise will 
affect the judiciary in about the same manner and to the same 
extent as any other method of constitutional amendment by 
popular vote. The recall of judicial decisions, therefore, despite 
its somewhat misleading name, does not directly affect the judi- 
ciary, but rather is a scheme for a perpetual popular convention^ 
by which the constitution may be made always to mean what a 
majority of the electorate wish it to mean. Whatever our views 
may be about the desirability of this method of constitutional 
amendment (and personally it seems to me an innovation which 
will be found to be impracticable in operation and fraught with 
danger to our institutions,) we shall be obliged to concede that 
its adoption would leave our judicial system in just about the 

(126) 



No. 2] SELECTING AND REMOVING JUDGES 79 

situation which it now occupies in our scheme of government, 
although it is to be feared that judges would not find the task 
of interpretation of our constitution any less perplexing and 
difficult after its provisions had been subjected to the process 
of amendment by the recall of decisions. 

The recall of judges, however, vitally affects the position of 
the judiciary in our governmental plan. The recall of judges, if 
adopted, would be exercised, we may assume, either because the 
recalled judge is corrupt or incompetent, or because his view of 
the law does not agree with that of the electorate, or so much of 
it as takes a sufficiently active interest in the subject to go to the 
polls and vote on the question. In so far as we favor the recall 
as a cure for the corrupt or incompetent judge, I have already 
suggested the wisdom of careful inquiry directed toward the 
question whether our system of selection is the best adapted to 
prevent the recurrence of this evil. A second consideration 
should be whether, assuming the existence of a properly safe- 
guarded system of selecting judges, the rare case of corruption 
or gross incompetency in judicial office under such a system 
could not be adequately dealt with through the process of im- 
peachment. We should also inquire whether the right or priv- 
ilege of recall would be likely to be wisely and justly exercised, 
so that only the corrupt and incompetent judge would be re- 
called, and finally, whether the recall would leave to the judge 
that freedom and independence which are essential to the main- 
tenance of personal rectitude and to the exercise of sound pro- 
fessional judgment. 

In the case of the recall of the judge because his view of the 
law or the constitution is not acceptable to the people, we sub- 
ject, always potentially at least, the law itself, through the person 
of the judge, to " the wanton assaults and the daily aggressions 
of party spirit." The law itself, through its duly constituted 
mouthpiece, becomes the center and subject of political strife. 
The judge's position is changed from that of the arbiter of pri- 
vate litigation determining rights of individuals, unbiased by 
personal or political considerations, to that of the assailant, or 
defender, as the case may be, of the law or the constitution, and 
the soundness or unsoundness of his decision as the sufficient 

(127) 



So EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

reason for the continuation or cutting off of his official Hfe be- 
comes the subject of poHtical controversy. Such a step is neces- 
sarily the great and final one, not only toward pure democracy, 
but toward shifting the law, wherever it affects in the same way 
any considerable number of people, from its semi-scientific 
basis, as developed by the skill and professional learning of the 
magistrate and of the legal profession generally, to a political 
basis, and its development in form and substance must be pro- 
foundly influenced by the determination of popular vote. 

Such are in brief outline the issues, or rather the salient 
points which present themselves in any orderly and logical 
examination of the current discussions of our judicial system. 
How genuine are the faults with which our existing system 
is charged, whether the proposed changes are wise or unwise in 
principle — in short, whether they are worth the price we must 
pay for them — and whether they will work in practise, are ques- 
tions which I shall leave to the speakers of the afternoon to 
answer. They will support their conclusions with appropriate 
arguments. 

I shall take the liberty of introducing to you all three of the 
speakers of the afternoon at once ; not only to avoid the usual 
unnecessary repetitions in performing that function, but in 
order that the harmonious development of the discussion may 
be jarred by no discordant note from your somewhat conserva- 
tive presiding officer. 

The paper on the elective and appointive methods of selec- 
tion of judges will be read by the Honorable Learned Hand, 
United States District Judge for the Southern District of New 
York. Of Judge Hand it need be said only that any system of 
selecting judges which operates to select a judge of the learning, 
ability and fidelity of Judge Hand has much to commend 
it, and if a system could be devised by which all judges should be 
of like character and ability, there would be no occasion for 
this discussion. 

Mr. Roe and Mr. Dougherty, who will read papers on the 
recall of judges, are well-known lawyers in this city, well quali- 
fied by experience and ability for the discussion of that sub- 
ject. I suspect that the unconscious influence of environment 

(128) 



No. 2] SELECTING AND REMOVING JUDGES 8 1 

will be revealed in their respective papers. I do not know 
what their views are upon this important subject, but I know 
that Mr. Dougherty was born and has lived all his life in con- 
servative New York. Mr. Roe, on the other hand, was for 
some years the law partner and associate of Senator La Follette, 
and must have imbibed progressivism in the very air he breathed, 
and so they are t>'pical representatives of the two schools 
of thought on this subject, and we may look to them to present 
the views and strongest arguments of each with respect to it. 

(129) 



THE ELECTIVE AND APPOINTIVE METHODS OF 
SELECTION OF JUDGES ' 

LEARNED HAND 
United States District Court, New York City 

IN England the crown has from the earliest times appointed 
the judges, originally with no very definite limitation of 
their duties to functions now regarded as judicial. They 
remained subject to removal by the crown until 1688, after 
which time their tenure was during good behavior. One of the 
important causes which dethroned the Stuarts was their coercion 
of the judges, and much of the American feeling for an inde- 
pendent judiciary as the security of liberty undoubtedly goes 
back to that period and to the great English struggle for popu- 
lar government, because the colonists were nearly all good 
Whigs and especially fond of the Bill of Rights. Nevertheless, 
it was George III, the apostle of absolutism, who finally secured 
the entire independence of the judges by providing that they 
should keep their commissions on the demise of the crown. 

When the colonies came to make their constitutions, they 
generally accepted such institutions as they were used to, and 
most of them provided for the appointment of the judges by 
the executive. Yet even at the outset, in some states the 
elective principle obtained. Thus in New Jersey, Virginia and 
South Carolina the legislature elected the judges, and Vermont 
and Tennessee when they became states in 1793 and 1796 each 
adopted the same practise. Georgia has the distinction, good or 
bad, of being in 1812 the first state to elect any judges by vote 
of the people, though the change applied only to the inferior 
courts, and it was not till twenty years later that Mississippi, in 
a burst of democratic enthusiasm, became the first to elect all 
its judges by popular vote. Since that time this method has 
been very generally extended. The great state of New York, 

' Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 25, 1912. 

(130) 



METHODS OF SELECTION OF JUDGES 83 

which gave her laws to many of her younger sisters, followed in 
1846 under the full tide of Jacksonian democracy, and has 
been consistently loyal ever since. To-day the process is com- 
plete except in some of the eastern states. The legislature ap- 
points in Rhode Island, Virginia and South Carolina, while the 
governor, with the consent of the senate, appoints in New 
Jersey and Mississippi, the governor and council in New Hamp- 
shire, Massachusetts and Maine, the governor alone in Delaware, 
and the legislature on nomination of the governor in Connecti- 
cut. Thus, in three-fourths of the states to-day judges are 
elected by popular vote. It may be said that the institution of 
judicial election has hitherto generally been regarded by the 
American people as implied in a thorough-going democratic 
state. 

To ascertain the effect upon the judiciary of elective selection 
is difficult without a good deal oft research ; perhaps it is im- 
possible. Undoubtedly, the general opinion of the bar is in 
favor of appointment. I think there can be no impropriety in 
my saying that the federal judges have generally, in most parts 
of the country, a somewhat better reputation with the bar for 
ability than the state judges. Probably the greatest state courts 
have been in states which appointed their judges. Thus, 
Masssachusetts has been easily pre-eminent over all other states 
in the quality of her judges, and for many years New Hamp- 
shire had a court which was hardly, if at all, second to that of 
Massachusetts. New Jersey has likewise an enviable record. 
However, the evidence is by no means all one way. Michigan 
for a while had a court of most distinguished reputation ; New 
York, since 1846, has produced inclividuals of fine capacity, and 
Vermont and Pennsylvania have had creditable records. Be- 
sides, the problem is much complicated by other factors, espe- 
cially the character of the tenure, of which more hereafter. 
For example, in by far the greater number of states the federal 
judges receive a larger salary than the highest state judges. 
Their tenure is for life and until about twenty years ago appeals, 
at least from the circuit judges, were so expensive and slow as 
to be practically impossible in ordinary cases. As a result, the 
position of federal judges in most states was more attractive in 

(131) 



84 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

every way than any place on the state bench, so that if the 
incumbents deserved or had a higher reputation than the state 
judges, it should not necessarily be attributed to the mode of 
their selection. 

Again, in Massachusetts the whole administration of the state 
was for long on a decided^y higher level than elsewhere, and the 
character of the judges was very probably only a reflection of a 
generally better political tone. In New York, there certainly 
has been a great general decadence in judicial ability since 1846, 
due to a good many other reasons, I believe, than the election 
of the judges, and indeed, perhaps, not due to that at all. The 
evidence, therefore, would hardly justify one in going further 
than to say that the experience of sixty years seems to suggest 
a falling off in ability where the judges have been elected. 
How far this decline in ability has had to do with the present 
popular distrust of the judiciary as a whole, it is naturally impos- 
sible to tell. That it has perhaps had nothing at all to do with 
it is suggested by the fact that on the whole the federal judic- 
iary is at present more jealously and suspiciously regarded than 
that of the states. 

There remain a priori considerations, at best feeble supports 
for a conclusion. In the first place, one is tempted to say with 
Dana in the Massachusetts convention of 1853 and Chambers 
in the Maryland convention of 185 i that the mode of selection 
makes very little difference and that the same influences which 
control the caucus — or, as we should say, the party — will con- 
trol the governor. There has been some corroboration of this 
in New York, whenever the governor has been in harmony 
with the local leaders ; other experience I do not know. How- 
ever, there have arisen governors from time to time who have 
been independent of the party, while they have not been strong 
enough to dominate it. Such men as Mr. Justice Hughes, for 
example, would have appointed, and did appoint, different judges 
from those whom either of the parties have as a rule put upon 
the bench. In short, in so far as a governor becomes inde- 
pendent of party influences we must expect that the result of ap- 
pointment will be different from that of election, which is neces- 
sarily dependent upon party control. Have we a right to ex- 

(132) 



No. 2] METHODS OF SELECTION OF JUDGES 85 

pect that this will become less or more frequent, and have we a 
right to expect that if it becomes more frequent, it will result 
well or ill? 

The signs of the times, in so far as w^e can see, point to a 
decay in the party system. Direct primaries are a blow to it, 
little though they appear to be such superficially, because, while 
at first blush they serve to accentuate the division of voters into 
parties, they at the same time tend to destroy the influence of 
the permanent party leaders, as indeed present experience is 
showing and as the universal instinct of the leaders themselves 
foretold, though their speech denied it. Such primaries un- 
doubtedly give a great advantage to the independent individual 
of taking personality, providing he can command enough money 
to secure publicity; they tend to minimize the influence of those 
who through the general apathy keep the control of nominating 
machinery. 

If with a system of direct primaries there be coupled the 
short ballot, the governor's independence of party will be in- 
creased. Moreover, it would hardly be possible that direct 
primaries should continue without the addition of the short 
ballot, for popular interest would certainly not sui'vive an appeal 
by several candidates for the many oflftces now elective. Indeed, 
the very apathy which has led to party domination in the case 
of minor administrative officers would frustrate a system of 
primaries for all such as are now elected. The system of direct 
election has broken down, because the people cannot be ex- 
pected to know anything about the minor officers to be elected. 
Even less would they distinguish between the candidates for 
nomination to such offices. The success of direct primaries, 
even for the chief executive, depends in large measure upon 
the power and responsibility of that officer. The short ballot 
to-day commands the assent of substantially all parties, and is 
the proposal apparently most likely to succeed of all those at 
present prominent. It results in a consolidation of power which 
undoubtedly would not be accepted without some continuous 
popular control over the executive, but it is so obviously a 
necessary corollary to direct selection of the executive by the 
people that even the most thorough-going democrat will be 

6 i, ^'^^^ 



86 EFFICIENT GOVERNMEN7 [Vol. Ill 

likely to accept it. That it should include the appointment of 
judges by the executive is most probable. A judge is an ad- 
ministrative officer, little as American traditions like to concede 
it ; he is concerned only with the enforcement of the sovereign's 
will ; and there is no reason why he should not be appointed 
by the executive, if other administrative officers are so ap- 
pointed. The considerations which require his independence 
of the executive arise only after he is appointed to office ; the;;'' 
affect only his indifference to pressure in individual cases, pres- 
sure which cannot be exercised in advance of their occurrence. 
If the short ballot comes, every reason for it applies to includ- 
ing judges within it. 

In answer to the first question, therefore, we may say that 
there is good reason for supposing that in the future a directly 
nominated governor will appoint the judges, and that whether 
or not he has this power, it would, if he did have it, be under 
the control of influences different from those that have con- 
trolled election or would continue to control it if judges should 
remain elective. The distinction which Dana in Massachusetts 
and Chambers in Maryland could not see in the fifties would 
arise if the people became accustomed to choose their chief 
executives directly, whether by direct primary nominations or 
by direct election without party name or symbol and without 
preliminary nomination. There remains the question whether 
the operation of this change will affect the appointment of 
judges favorably or not. 

While a governor elected by direct primary would be more 
directly responsive to popular feeling, since his continued pos- 
session of power would depend upon the popular approval of 
his personal conduct, his judicial appointments, unless scandal- 
ous, would weigh very little in the balance for or against him ; 
for so far as we can judge, the personnel of candidates for the 
bench is a matter of almost complete indifference to the people 
at large. It is true that they become easily aroused over the 
conduct of an incumbent, but between candidates they usually, 
and quite rightly, assume the indifference of ignorance. Thus 
a governor would not have to reckon very seriously with pres- 
ent-day public opinion in his judicial appointments if he 

(134) 



No. 2] METHODS OF SELECTION OF JUDGES 87 

avoided scandal. Because of the'same public indifference, the 
party leaders need reckon, and have reckoned, but little with 
public opinion in the nomination of elective judges. This 
would remain quite as true under^a system of direct primaries 
for judges, for it is hardly conceivable that primary contests 
between judges should arouse much public interest. 

Assuming, therefore, that direct public interest in the matter, 
barring actually scandalous instances, must be eliminated, which- 
ever the method of choice, have we reason to suppose that a 
governor, dependent upon the people, would do better or worse 
than the party leaders acting as it were behind the scenes? 
This question is of course not peculiar to the appointment of 
judges ; it raises indeed the whole (Question of the working of the 
short ballot. An executive vested like the President with general 
power of appointment, but unlike him directly dependent upon 
the popular will for his selection, dven while he may in the case 
of a single appointment have little to reckon with, does on the 
whole carry his record to the people, and it all goes together 
into a general pot which the people may or may not relish, as 
the flavor turns out. But it is also true that precisely the same 
responsibility rests upon the party collectively, and the party 
has the same incentive to act agreeably to the popular taste ; 
it is moreover true that a party is after all nothing but a group 
of men, who enjoy power and wish to do what they can to keep 
it. Parliamentary government may be better or worse than a 
directly representative executive, but it is quite idle to consider 
parliamentary government for the United States, for any time 
that we can see. The real point with us is this : that is not par- 
liamentary government which vests an uncertain power in the 
hands of unknown men who have no formal responsibility, so 
that the actual power is in fact unseen, and the individuals who 
exercise it do not themselves come before the public. A min- 
istry is one thing, a cabal another. We cannot fail to profit by 
a change from appointment by cabal to appointment by a genu- 
inely representative elected executive. 

While, therefore, under the system which has actually existed, 
it is perhaps questionable whether appointed judges have been 
better than elected, there is good ground to suppose that under 

(135) 



88 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

a system of appointment by executives not dependent upon 
party, judges will be better than if chosen formally by an indif- 
ferent electorate, but actually by a group the power, influence 
and tenure of whose uncertain members cannot be definitely 
ascertained. 

Strictly speaking, the subject of this paper does not include 
the tenure of judges, and a consideration of that subject cer- 
tainly trenches somewhat upon the subject of the recall. 
Nevertheless, historically the method of selecting judges has 
been interwoven in constitutional discussion with tenure in such a 
way that it is really quite impossible to omit all reference to the 
latter. In the Maryland and Massachusetts conventions in the 
early fifties, the conservatives realized that the real fight was not 
as to whether judges should be elected or appointed, but whether 
they should be subject to political influence after taking office. 
All the arguments which now appear in relation to the recall 
were made with as much ability then as now. On the one 
hand the conservatives feared for the integrity of the judges; 
on the other, the democrats resented their absolute inde- 
pendence. There was no suggestion made of popular elec- 
tion for a term of good behavior and the institution does 
not exist in the United States to-day. In Massachusetts, New 
Hampshire, Rhode Island and Delaware at the present time the 
judges hold during good behavior; in the other states for terms 
varying from two years in Vermont to twenty- one in Pennsyl- 
vania. In Massachusetts judges are subject to recall by the 
governor on address by a majority vote of both houses, without 
charges or trial ; in New York by a two-thirds vote of both 
houses on charges ; and legislative recall is a common feature 
in state constitutions. The limitation of tenure which was so 
much feared a half century ago, therefore, has actually been 
brought about, and the judges are to that extent within popular 
control. Whether such limitation and control is desirable or 
not is quite another question. 

The purpose of a limited tenure is of course to relieve the 
oflJice of an undesirable incumbent, a purpose certainly wise and 
commendable. There are two grounds for removing a judge : 
first, that he has actually misconducted himself in ways which 

(136) 



No. 2] METHODS OF SELECTION OF JUDGES 89 

mayt)e specified and proved; second, that he has shown him- 
self undesirable in respect to his ability, his political or eco- 
nomic bias, or that vague range of conduct which we group 
together under temperament. Fair play and the general ex- 
perience of most civilized peoples require for the first cause 
something in the nature of charges and proof; this would 
indeed meet with very general approval. It is as to action 
on the second ground that difference of opinion arises. One 
party insists that since the judge has no right to regard any 
popular expression except what has already obtained formal 
authoritative expression, therefore to make him answerable 
to public opinion is to put upon him an influence which 
cannot possibly operate except to corrupt his integrity. For 
popular opinion, intent upon its as yet unexpressed purpose, 
will forget that it is the judge's duty to regard only what has 
already received expression. The other party insists that 
though the judge is unquestionably limited by the existing 
authoritative expression of the public will, so also are all other 
administrators of law, as to whom immunity from popular con- 
trol is not thought necessary. Further, it is insisted that there 
is no practical line of distinction between interpretation and 
legislation, whatever may be the case dialectically. Even the 
most carefully drawn statute leaves room for alternative con- 
struction and to choose between two constructions is in effect to 
legislate. Further, in the interpretation of the broad phrases 
of the constitutions, and in the treatment of precedents, just as 
they did in developing the common law from the register of writs^ 
the judges are legislating, building up a customary law which is 
as much their creation as any statute is that of the legislature. 
This power, it is said, the people have come to recognize as 
giving so wide a latitude to judicial conduct that in a democracy 
it cannot be immune from some popular control, from sub- 
jection to the dominant political convictions of the time. 
While such control is a dangerous thing in that it may twist the 
conscience of a judge into pretending there is an ambiguity of 
expression where there is none, nevertheless it is more danger- 
ous to leave such broad power in the hands of men in no way 
responsive to popular control. 

(137) 



90 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

It is practically quite idle to discuss the comparative value of 
these lines of argument, if the issue be absolute independence, 
because it is certain that looking forward to any time we can 
now hope to influence, the American people will not give up 
some control over judicial tenure. The consistent tendency of 
sixty years is if anything stronger to-day than it has ever 
been before. It is quite useless to consider how often any 
genuine ambiguity of expression really exists, and whether a 
sympathetic effort to reassume the position of the legislator or 
of the preceding judge will not generally solve the problem. 
The people believe that the usual judge has not the detachment 
of will which makes this possible for him, and that he will in- 
evitably carry some bias to the problem. I may say that my 
personal experience with judges quite corroborates that belief. 
The people have hitherto attempted to correct a bias contrary 
to the popular will temporarily dominant, by bringing up the 
judge for examination at stated intervals. They will desire to 
continue to exercise this control in some equivalent way. 

Therefore the question arises, if the judges become appoint- 
ive in the way I have suggested, what shall be their tenure? Is 
the governor to appoint them for stated terms during which they 
are independent? Is he to appoint them on good behavior 
subject to legislative recall? Is he to appoint them for stated 
terms subject to legislative recall? Is the action of the legisla- 
ture in the matter of the recall to be subject itself to a refer- 
endum? Is there to be an immediate popular recall? Starting 
with some popular control over the tenure of judges, which 
must in any case be the price of the surrender of the power to 
elect, what is the most desirable plan? This, it seems to me, 
depends very largely upon the degree to which constitutions are 
to check the will of the majority. Fixed terms operate for 
their earlier part to remove the judge from the pressure either 
of persons or of popular ideas ; as they run out they subject him 
to both. An indefinite tenure, with popular power to recall, sub- 
stantially removes a judge forever from personal pressure, while 
it continually subjects him to popular ideas. In so far as the 
constitutions check the popular will, his \niegnty is certainly 
menaced; in so far as by referendum or othenvise the dis- 

(138) 



No. 2] METHODS 0I< SELECTION OF JUDGES 91 

tinction between the constitution and the popular will is lessened 
his integrity becomes safer. Yet even in the first case, the pro- 
tection is not great. Judicial terms in the United States do not 
on the average exceed six or eight years, I believe. If the 
judge is to retain entire independence through his term, that 
term will not be lengthened, and popular memory is likely to 
last for two or three years. 

We may sum up the positions, therefore, as follows : Any 
limitation of tenure should be objectionable to those who set 
great store upon constitutional limitations of the immediate 
popular will, who chiefly dread, in the classic language of 
American conservatives, the rule of the mob. It is true that to 
them the present system of fixed terms should be monstrous in 
that for a substantial period it menaces the judge's constitutional 
integrity; but in so far as it gives him some measure of inde- 
pendence of popular pressure it is good, even though it submits 
him also to dependence on persons as his term runs out. To 
those, on the other hand, who look for a more ready expression 
of popular will, the fixed term has no advantage in giving inde- 
pendence of popular feeling, while it has the great demerit of 
subjecting the judge to personal influences. Continuous power 
to recall eliminates the latter, while a more plastic system would 
greatly lessen the number of occasions when the judge would 
come into conflict with such a determined popular feeling as he 
should fear. To the latter class, therefore, some form of recall 
is better than fixed stated t.3rms. What, then, is the price which 
must be paid if terms are to be extended to good behavior 
— who is to judge that good behavior? Shall it be the gov- 
ernor, the legislature, the people or any combination of the two ? 
A recall by the governor would rather perpetuate the evils of 
appointments for fixed terms; it may be dismissed. There 
remain legislative recall, popular recall, and a combination of 
the two. Legislative recall has been in force in Massachusetts 
and in many other states for over a century and has been sel- 
dom resorted to, though it was used once in Massachusetts most 
unjustly. It has the advantage of being already customary and 
of giving better opportunity for preliminary discussion and for 
recognition of the fact that a judge may have been led to an 

(139) 



92 



EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 



undesirable result merely from loyalty to his duties, merely from 
unwillingness to usurp authority. Nevertheless, if the matter 
ended with the legislature, it would be no equivalent for the 
surrender of direct popular control now exercised through fixed 
terms, and I think it quite clear that the people would not 
accept it. Moreover, in a state where there was a referendum 
upon legislative action generally, it would be unlikely that this 
legislative action alone would remain unreviewable. If the 
people could review the legislative action, however, there could 
be no just objection that full control over judges was lacking ; 
it would not be too speedy, but it would be effective. 

In conclusion, therefore, we may say that under a system in 
which the importance of constitutional limitations is not strongly 
felt because the institutions easily reflect popular feeling, the 
practical conservative position would be to appoint judges on 
indefinite terms, subject to recall by the legislature, with refer- 
endum to the people, and that this is a thoroughly democratic 
institution. The radical position would be fixed terms with 
immediate popular recall. The intermediate position would be 
indefinite terms with immediate popular recall, from which the 
judge's position ought, I think, to exempt him. It is not un- 
reasonable to insist upon that opportunit}' for discussion which 
the preliminary action of the legislature would insure. 

C140) 



THE RECALL OF JUDGES' 

GILBERT E. ROE 

New York City 

I do not advocate the recall of judges as a means of correcting 
all judicial abuses. I do not think it would revolutionize 
courts., and I do not think that the recall should be applied 
to judges until it is applied to all other public officials. The 
position of those who advocate the recall of judges simply is 
that when the people in good time and in their wisdom, if 
wisdom it is, have decided to bring public officers generally 
under the control of the recall, no distinction shall be made in 
the case of judges. The issue, so far as there is an issue on 
this question, is between those who say that a distinction should 
be made in the case of judges, that reasons exist why the recall 
should not be applied to judges when it might be perhaps suc- 
cessfully applied to other officials, and those who hold that no 
such distinction should be made. 

If there ought to be any distinction, in my judgment it would 
be in favor of applying the recall to judges rather than to many 
other public officials. Here is my principal reason for saying 
this : the judges, more than any other class of officials, ought 
to be close to the public if they are going to perform their 
proper function in this government. The President, with his 
control of the army and navy and the vast influence which he 
has the means of exercising, may be able to carry forward a 
policy for a time without popular support; the legislative branch 
of the government, with its control of the finances, also is 
measurably independent of the people's will ; but the courts 
have no army and navy, no control of the finances; they must 
depend for their support upon the approval of the people of the 
country, or they must fail in their function. Therefore I say 

' An address delivered at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 
25, 1912. 

(141) 



94 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

that whatever brings the judge and the people closer together 
is in my judgment a good thing, and that is the reason — one of 
the reasons, at least — why I advocate the application of the 
recall to judges. 

The recall would be a good thing not only for the judge and 
his decisions, but for the people themselves, and after all that is 
the real reason why we want any of these democratic measures. 
I am not at all sure that where there are direct primaries better 
candidates have been nominated than under the old system, but 
I do know this, that it has been a good thing for the people ; 
the discussion, the agitation, the education, the interest excited 
has laid broad and deep the principles of democracy in those 
communities, and that is why it has been good. And I beUeve 
the same thing will be true of the initiative and referendum. 

I was impressed with one or two things that the preceding 
speaker said, and the unconscious way in which he said them. 
Perhaps it was the intentional eloquence of understatement. 
He spoke quite as a matter of course of the dissatisfaction 
existing on the part of people so far as the courts were con- 
cerned, indicating that there was not the trust and confidence 
existing between them that should exist. Again, he said that 
the people were almost wholly indifferent to the character of a 
candidate for judicial office but were very alert as to the acts of 
the incumbent of that office. Both those expressions are true, 
and both thoughts relate directly to the subject of the recall of 
judges. That there does exist in this country to-day a wide- 
spread distrust of the courts — not of individual judges merely, 
but of the courts and their purposes, and a dissatisfaction with 
the result of the work of the courts, — is a fact that we must all 
admit. I have tried to analyze somewhat the basis or reason 
for that dissatisfaction, and as briefly as I can I want to tell you 
my conclusions about it. 

Since the foundation of this government, the people have 
been reaching out and gaining more and more complete and 
direct control over both the executive and the legislative 
departments of the government. You know that the constitu- 
tion provided for the device of an electoral college because it 
did not trust the people, because the framers of the constitution 

(142) 



No. 2] THE RECALL OF JUDGES 95 

were unwilling to commit to the mass of people the important 
function of electing the President of the United States. Then 
also it was felt necessary that one branch of the legislature 
should represent the wealth and financial interest of the country, 
hence the provision for electing United States senators by state 
legislatures and electing them for long terms. At once the 
people set about destroying these barriers, and so they found a 
way to get around the electoral college, and to abrogate the con- 
stitutional provisions providing for the election of United States 
senators by state legislatures. The direct primary is another 
step in the same direction, so that more and more all through 
the years from the time the constitution was framed to this 
moment the people have been seeking and securing more com- 
plete control of the executive and legislative branches of their 
government, bending these ofiicials more completely to their 
will, and as I think, properly so. But that is not the question 
at this moment. 

With the judiciary just the opposite course has been pursued, 
or rather the judiciary has traveled an opposite road. With a 
constitution that gave so little power to the Supreme Court of 
the United States that John Jay, the first Chief Justice, resigned, 
because he said there was not power enough in the office to 
make it worth a man's time to hold it, — starting out from that 
point and coming down to this time the courts by their decisions 
have removed themselves more and more from popular control. 
I am not going to enter on the discussion of the question 
whether the constitution granted to the court the right to 
declare a law unconstitutional ; it is my belief that it did not. 
That question is one of the most interesting in all our history. 
But we all agree upon this, that when the doctrine was first 
announced that a court could declare a law unconstitutional, 
always that announcement was coupled with the expression that 
it was a power so dangerous for a court to exercise, so danger- 
ous to what we call popular government, that a court would 
never exercise it except in a case that was free from all doubt. 
When you put a statute side by side with the written constitu- 
tion and it was perfectly plain that the two were in conflict 
only then could the court say that the statute was unconstitu' 

(143) 



96 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

tional and must fall. Everyone agrees that that was the 
position the court took when it first announced the doctrine. 
But today, so far have our courts got away from that old land- 
mark laid down by Marshall and other great judges of that day 
that no one knows to-day, when a legislature or the Congress 
passes a law, whether it is law or not until it has been passed 
on by the courts. We have often found of late years, when it 
has been sought to remedy some great abuse, as in the income- 
tax law, the workmen's compensation acts, employers' liability 
laws and many others, that there has been built up a great body 
of public sentiment in favor of the law, and then that public 
sentiment became so strong that it could knock successfully at 
the doors of a legislature or the Congress and command atten- 
tion there. So after long days or weeks or years of discussion 
the law was passed by the Congress or a state legislature, each 
body containing many of the most eminent lawyers of the 
state or nation, every objection possible having been brought 
up and discussed and answered and provided for, and then the 
law went to the President, who had the benefit of the advice of 
the ablest minds of the country, and he signed it, and it was 
written on the statute books. After all this, the day comes to 
enforce this law, and you go into court on it and the question 
is all argued out whether it is constitutional or not, and the 
court thinks it is. Then there is an appeal to the next court. 
The next court thinks it is, and perhaps that involves a decision 
of four or five or six judges, all holding it constitutional. Then 
another appeal is taken to a little higher court, and perhaps 
here three judges out of five say that it is not constitutional, 
that it shall not stand. So then you have the word of three 
men against all the wisdom of the lower courts, of the President, 
of both houses of Congress and of the people — and your law 
falls. 

Because that thing has happened in this country within your 
memory and mine not once but many times, not on unimpor- 
tant matters, but on matters that touch vitally the lives and the 
happiness of the people in a majority of the homes of this 
country, because laws of the kind above referred to have been 
stricken down and destroyed, because three or four men clothed 

(144) 



No. 2] THE RECALL OF JUDGES 97 

with judicial authority have set themselves up in opposition to 
the will and intelligence of the rest of the country, because of 
this there has been a demand on the part of the people to bring 
these judicial officers more completely within their control. 

The result of bringing them within the popular control would 
be good for the judges and good for the people. We lawyers 
are a good deal to blame about the mistakes that judges make. 
If the first speaker had been elected to the United States 
Senate at the time he was appointed to the bench he would 
have brought just the same integrity, ability, conscientiousness 
of purpose and fidelity to the one set of duties that he has 
brought to the other, — and yet in public estimation how differ- 
ent would his position be. We feel that it is anybody's priv- 
ilege to go out and praise or criticize or discuss the members 
of the United States Senate or House of Representatives, and 
the result is on the whole the establishment of a very good 
feeling between the people and the members of the law-making 
branch of the government ; but when a man goes on the bench 
we have been taught to feel that he goes into a different realm, 
that his acts must not be discussed, his conduct must not be 
brought under criticism. I do not believe that that is a right 
view, but I say we lawyers are largely responsible for bringing 
about the false sentiment on that question, and the thing that 
would do most to correct that is the recall. Make your judges 
and their actions the subject of discussion ; let the people talk 
about them, and not be fined for contempt of court if they do 
talk about them ; let us discuss what the judge does just as we 
discuss what the member of Congress does. 

It was said that the people are apt to know nothing about 
the character of the candidate for judicial office and to be 
indifferent to it. That is why I would have the recall and 
would have a life tenure unless the recall was exercised. In 
the hurly-burly of an election there are many candidates and 
many issues, the record of any particular candidate is lost sight 
of. But in a recall election the man and his conduct stand out; 
it is the one thing you are considering. There has been in 
this country just one attempt to recall a judge ; that was in 
Oregon in 191 1. A judge there presided at a murder trial in a 
7 (145) 



98 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 

very unpopular way, making such rulings that the man charged 
with the crime escaped conviction. A considerable part of the 
community believed that the judge's decisions were wrong, and 
that they argued such corruption or such incompetency that he 
ought to be removed. So they started out to circulate a recall 
petition. As you know, every state that has a law providing a 
recall, safeguards it so that several months must elapse between 
the filing of the petition and the election. In this case it was 
necessary to get twenty-five per cent of the voters of the district 
to sign the petition that a recall election be held. The law also 
provides that each side shall at the public expense state its 
reasons why the recall is demanded on the one side, and why 
the judge should be continued on the other. After that the 
election is to be held some months in the future. The people 
in Oregon did not take even the first step, although the case 
appeared a rather flagrant one. They could not get anywhere 
near the twenty-five per cent necessary even to submit the 
question to another election. But, you may say, if a recall 
would be so seldom exercised, why do you advocate it? For 
just the reason that if there is the power of recall, if the people 
feel that they have control over the judge, and the judge feels 
that he is really the servant and not the master, then you will 
have a condition which will make the recall unnecessary except 
in rare instances and at long intervals. 

(146) 



SUBSTITUTES FOR THE RECALL OF JUDGES' 

J. HAMPDEN DOUGHERTY 
New York City 

AFTER almost two years of discussion does anything 
remain to be said in favor of judicial recall ? No pub- 
lic question in recent years has received more con- 
sideration. It has been the theme of debates, pamphlets, 
books and resolutions. Practically all the bar associations 
throughout the country have opposed it. The debate in Con- 
gress upon the admission of Arizona with its constitutional pro- 
vision for judicial recall was so exhaustive as to leave nothing 
to be said. The speeches of statesmen like Root and Lodge in 
the Senate, and Pickett, Kinkaid, Legare and others in the 
House, conclusively showed its fallacy. President Taft's veto 
message, a great state paper destined to rank high in history, 
thoroughly shattered the notion. The vote upon the Arizona 
bill in the Senate and the House would be completely mis- 
understood were it assumed to represent a preponderant senti- 
ment in favor of judicial recall. Many senators and repre- 
sentatives to whom the idea was repugnant voted for Arizona's 
admission because they felt that the state itself had the right to 
determine whether it would instal such an unwise policy or 
not. A few opponents of the measure believed, as did Presi- 
dent Taft, that such a revolutionary doctrine was subversive of 
republican government. 

Judicial recall has been abandoned by some of its most con- 
spicuous advocates and the notion of recall of judicial decisions 
substituted for it. Thus Colonel Roosevelt who, two years ago, 
in describing judges as " fossilized minds " asserted that judicial 
recall might become advisable, now advocates recall of judicial 
decisions. Two recent critics of our judicial system, Mr. 
Gilbert E. Roe and Mr. William L. Ransom, differ so radically 

' Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 25, 191 2. 

U47) 



lOO EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

that the arguments of one may well be set off against those of 
the other. In his interesting book entitled Our Judicial 
Oligarchy Mr. Roe regards judicial recall as the remedy 
to prevent the courts from usurping powers which according to 
him they do not possess. Mr. Ransom, on the other hand, 
while equally alarmed at what he conceives to be judicial 
usurpation, invokes the remedy of recall of judicial decisions. 
No one has more incisively refuted judicial recall than has 
Mr. Ransom, and no one has better shown the fallacy of the 
recall of judicial decisions than has Mr. Roe. 
Of judicial recall Mr. Ransom says: 

If a judge incorrectly gauges " the preponderant opinion "as to the 
social necessity for a particular law , why remove him ? Why not let the 
people vote directly to decide what the majority opinion is? If a judge 
is dishonest, impeach him ; if he is incompetent, remove him by com- 
plaint before the legislature or refuse him re-election, but it does not 
seem quite fair to require him to take the final guess as to what the 
" prevailing morality " and the '* preponderant opinion " of a state re- 
ally is, and then chop off his judicial head if he " guesses " or ** calcu- 
lates " wrong. 

For Mr. Ransom's specific Mr. Roe, on the contrary, has the 
scantest respect. He says : 

The recall of judges is to be carefully distinguished from another idea, 
which is supported by some men of prominence, and which has come 
to be described as the " recall of judicial decisions." The former may 
be applied without materially departing from our constitutional form of 
government; the latter is absolutely destructive of the constitution. 
The recall of judges merely means that where a judge has shown from 
any cause that he is not discharging the functions of the judicial 
office in fundamental and important matters as the people desire, he 
will be discharged and a new judge possessing the necessary technical 
qualifications selected in his place. The recall of judicial decisions 
means that the wholly untrained layman shall undertake to do, person- 
ally, the highly specialized and technical work of a judge. The great 
vice in this idea, however, is that it would be used as a means of amend- 
ing the constitution by a majority vote. It would soon come about 
that laws would be passed, simply for the purpose of having them de- 
clared unconstitutional, and then by a popular vote overturning thede- 

(148) 



No. 2] SUBSTITUTES FOR THE RECALL OF JUDGES loi 

cision of the court, and in that respect amend the constitution. The 
constitution, therefore, would be immediately reduced to the level of a 
statute, since any portion of it could be amended, or repealed, at any 
time by a mere majority of the popular vote. While there is little like- 
lihood of this idea finding a permanent place in the minds of the people, 
that anyone should be found who seriously advocates this idea is signif- 
icant of the extent to which the dissatisfaction with the courts has gone, 
and ought to show the necessity of reforming the courts, along lines 
less revolutionary. 

Mr. Ransom has Colonel Roosevelt on his side. Colonel 
Roosevelt has written an introduction to Mr. Ransom's book in 
which he declares that the people ought to have the power to 
decide for themselves in the last report what legislation is neces- 
sary in exercising the "police" powers, or "general-welfare" 
powers, so as to give expression to the general morality and the 
general or common opinion of what is right and proper, and he 
is careful to say that he is advocating a system which " will ob- 
viate the need of such a drastic measure as the recall." What 
Colonel Roosevelt seems to overlook is that the people to-day 
enjoy ample power to change their constitutions so as to secure 
whatever legislation they may desire in the interest of the public 
welfare. 

Thus those who think judges usurpers and oligarchs are di- 
vided into two hostile bands. One would introduce judicial 
recall as the remedy, the other would have the people recall 
the judicial decision by popular vote, and each stigmatizes the 
other's panacea as in the last degree dangerous and unwise. 

Surely after all the discussion upon this subject, argument 
can hardly be needed to show the unwisdom of judicial recall. 
As I view it, the proposal is based upon two fallacies : 

First, it is declared that the judiciary has transcended its 
functions in passing upon the constitutionality of legislation, and 
that the judiciary is the undemocratic and unprogressive branch 
of the government. These things are asserted as to the judic- 
iary not only of the nation but of the several states ; yet in the 
majority of the states the judges of the higher courts are elected 
by popular vote, and, in many instances for short terms. 

Second, it is held that the courts, instead of attempting 

(149) 



I02 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

to follow the constitution which they have sworn to support 
and to which every statute should conform, ought, on the con- 
trary, to uphold a law in conflict with the constitution, if that 
law expresses the popular will, thus substituting the popular 
will, or as it has been called, the " manifest and express will of 
the people " for the constitution as their guide in certain classes 
of cases — this class being cases affecting the social conditions 
of the whole or a part of the community. According to this 
view, it is not the constitution but the so-called " popular will " 
that should be regarded as the law of the land. 

As I read history the courts have not usurped the power to 
declare legislation unconstitutional. To say that the judiciary 
is the unprogressive branch of the government is merely an- 
other way of saying that it is the business of the judges not to 
make law but to declare it, and in this sense the judiciary is the 
most conservative branch of the government. The courts say 
what the law is, not what they think it should be, and as con- 
stitutions are in theory at least easily amendable, the law can 
readily be so modified by amendment as to express the most 
enlightened public sentiment. The public will is presumably 
expressed in the constitution. The constitution must remain 
the supreme law until the people see fit to change it, and cer- 
tainly in the states the power of amendment of the constitution 
is easily available. In New York state the constitution is, if 
anything, too readily amendable. The constitution thus repre- 
sents the " popular will " for the time being, and to attempt to 
substitute something else as an expression of the popular will 
by an unconstitutional method is in reality to subvert the 
popular will. 

Even granting all the charges that of late have been made 
against the courts — and I am personally willing to concede that 
in some instances the courts have seemed arbitrary aud unjust 
and judges have been selected as a result of improper influences 
— I maintain that recall is not the remedy for any error in a 
judicial decision. 

The recall would undermine judicial independence. After 
all that has been said in Congress and elsewhere it is unneces- 
sary to show that a system which makes the judge liable to 

(150) 



No. 2] SUBSTITUTES FOR THE RECALL OF JUDGES 103 

removal, not for breach of duty, but upon the mere arbitrary 
determination of any power, whether a king, a legislature or 
the people, is destructive of manliness, integrity, and inde- 
pendence of character. As Preydent Taft has well said, no 
self-respecting man would accept judicial office with such a 
sword of Damocles hanging over him. 

The recall would inevitably fail. If I wished to pack the 
bench of this state with the tools of bosses, or the instru- 
ments of the great, powerful and wealthy interests that too 
often dominate legislatures and courts, I would strongly advo- 
cate judicial recall. Unscrupulous combinations with large 
funds at their command could use this power for the removal 
of the incorruptible judge. It Would be a weapon that could 
readily be turned against the people in behalf of special inter- 
ests, and nothing could be more dangerous to the popular 
welfare. 

Recall is a species of punishment; it implies dissatisfaction. 
To my mind there is something inherently wrong in punishing 
a judge for the expression of an honest and intelligent opinion. 
I can understand punishment when a person does wrong, but to 
punish one who with ability is presenting his own best convic- 
tions, is, to my mind, an utter absurdity. The bench should be 
composed of lawyers who express their convictions, not mere 
popular instruments. The recall was applied by James II 
of England, when he dismissed the Chief Justice of the Common 
Pleas and his associates, because they were unwilling to give a 
judgment that accorded with the royal will and not with the 
law. Jones, the Chief Justice, had been abject, even servile, 
but when told by the king that- he must give up either his 
opinion or his place, answered : " For my place I care little; I 
am old and worn out in the service of the Crown, but I am 
mortified to find that your Majesty thinks me capable of giving 
a judgment which none but an ignorant or a dishonest man 
could give." — " I am determined," said the king, " to have 
twelve judges who shall be all of my mind as to this matter." 
" Your Majesty," answered Jones, " may find twelve judges of 
your mind but hardly twelve lawyers." The king dismissed 
him and his associates. This is what would happen with 

(151) 



104 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

judicial recall in force. Judges would seek to know the popu- 
lar will and to follow it, which would be subversive of juris- 
prudence, and in turn of the rights and liberties of the people 
themselves. 

Assuming that there are errors in the present administration 
of justice which need ta be corrected, assuming that judges 
have encroached upon the legislative branch of the government 
and constituted themselves a species of upper house to veto 
legislation by substituting their opinion for legislative opinion, 
the remedy does not lie in the recall of judges or in recall 
of their decisions. On the contrary, the remedy is far simpler, 
more efficacious, more wholesome, less subversive and revo- 
lutionary. 

In the first place, compel judges to return to the sound, old- 
fashioned notion that no law may be held unconstitutional unless 
it clearly transcends legislative power. It is a travesty to assert 
a law plainly and palpably unconstitutional which five judges 
out of a bench of nine consider unconstitutional, while the re- 
maining four believe it within legislative authority. A statute 
which three judges out of seven or four judges out of nine deem 
constitutional is not plainly and palpably unconstitutional, and 
no court by any vain show of reasoning can make it appear to 
be so. Whenever there is doubt of the validity of a statute, 
the courts, as the late Mr. Justice Harlan of the Supreme Court 
admirably said, " must keep their hands off, leaving the legisla- 
ture to meet the responsibility for unwise legislation." If the 
economic wisdom of a legislative measure fails to meet judicial 
approval, that is no reason why a court, particularly a divided 
court, should declare the statute repugnant to the constitution. 
If the judges cannot agree that the law violates the constitution, 
the law should stand. The true theory was never stated better 
than by Mr. Justice Iredell, one of the earliest members of the 
United States Supreme Court, and Iredell, quite as much as 
Hamilton, was a staunch advocate of the duty and power of the 
judiciary to declare unconstitutional laws that were repugnant 
to the fundamental law of the land. As far back as 1 798 Iredell 
said: 

(152) 



No. 2] SUBSTITUTES FOR THE RECALL OF JUDGES 105 

If any act of Congress or of the legislature of a state violates those 
constitutional provisions, it is unquestionably void ; though I admit that 
as the authority to declare it void is of a delicate and awful nature , the 
court will never resort to that authority, but in a clear dj\d urgent case. 
If, on the other hand, the Legislature of the Union shall pass a law 
within the general scope of their constitutional power, the court cannot 
pronounce it void merely because it is, in their judgment, contrary to 
the principles of natural justice. The ideas of natural justice are regu- 
lated by no fixed standard ; the ablest and purest men have differed 
upon the subject. 

If necessary, I would favor an amendment to every constitu- 
tion depriving the judges of power to nullify laws by a majority 
vote. A constitutional provision might be thus formulated : 
Judges shall have power to declare statutes unconstitutional only 
when they plainly violate an express provision of the constitu- 
tion and then only by unanimous or greatly preponderating 
vote. 

Second, I would so amend the national judiciary law, or if 
necessary the federal constitution, as to permit a review in 
the highest tribunal of the nation of every statute involving the 
due-process-of-law clause, whether the statute was upheld or 
abrogated by the state court. The guarantee of due process of 
law is the same in words — in any event it is identical in mean- 
ing — in the national and the various state constitutions. Had 
the judiciary act permitted, the Ives case, which according to 
the New York court of appeals offended against this clause of 
the state and the national constitution, would have been re- 
viewed in the United States Supreme Court. With one final 
tribunal to determine whether any statute, state or federal, con- 
flicts with the due-process clause, there will be evolved a clear 
definition of the clause ; there will also be harmony in decisions. 
Furthermore, in every case involving this provision, attention 
will be centered upon the court that possesses this final authority. 
The guarantee of due process of law may have been distorted 
and extended far beyond its original meaning, as some claim ; 
yet, on the other hand, the words of a constitution must be 
fluid, and no meaning once assigned can control the signification 
of the words if new circumstances give them a new meaning. 

(153) 



Io6 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol.111 

Every interest which regards its property as unjustly affected, or 
perhaps confiscated, by a statute the purpose of which is social 
improvement, has a right to be heard, but all such statutes 
should be brought to final test before the Supreme Court of the 
United States. That court is to-day more progressive than any 
state court of elected judges — a fact that tends to show the fal- 
lacy of judicial recall. Judges entrenched in office for life, and 
therefore immune from recall except by impeachment, have 
been found more favorable to legislation designed to secure the 
popular welfare than judges elected and subject to recall at fixed 
intervals. 

Third, to avoid the danger of the creation of an utterly irre- 
sponsible bench, I would favor the freest criticism, consistent 
with decorum, of judicial decisions and especially of judicial 
conduct, and make impeachment and removability for cause real 
remedies. Every judge ought to discharge his duties under the 
shadow of possible impeachment. Impeachment could be made 
a live remedy. Its tedious and elaborate processes should be 
abolished. Let a judge be put on trial on the complaint of an 
association of lawyers or of any other responsible civic body. 
No servant of the people should enjoy immunity from removal 
for cause. Our political inventiveness is atrophied indeed if we 
cannot devise methods for the fair and expeditious trial of 
judges, without resorting to recall. With proper publicity judi- 
cial removal would rarely be necessary. The bar and the public 
should be stimulated to make all reasonable complaints so that 
the record of judges could be followed. A judge should be re- 
movable not merely for one specific offense, but for a generally 
poor and unsatisfactory record. 

The greatest evil is an elective system which permits bosses 
and machines to nominate judicial candidates and place upon 
the bench men of inferior calibre and feeble morality. An 
elective system naturally puts availability or activity in politics, 
and not fitness and integrity, in the foreground of qualifica- 
tions. I would return to the appointive system and have every 
judge hold office during good behavior — which should mean 
good behavior. If deemed desirable, judges should at periodic 
intervals, say of five or ten years, be compelled to pass ex- 

(154) 



No. 2] SUBSTITUTES FOR THE RECALL OF JUDGES 107 

aminations to prove that they possessed the qualifications for 
their great position. Every judge whose conduct fell below 
the high standard which the community has a right to prescribe 
for a judicial officer should become subject to removal. Every 
judge whose use of judicial patronage indicates subserviency to 
an organization or a boss should also be subject to removal. 

If the frontiers of judicial power are not properly defined, let 
us define them. I for one am convinced that in the nature of 
things courts must construe statutes and decide whether they 
conflict with the fundamental law. Some authority must be 
established to interpret legislation and to determine whether 
an act of the legislature is within the legislature's power; other- 
wise the legislature becomes supreme — even over the constitu- 
tion. But to recall a judge for the expression of an honest 
and intelligent conviction is to my mind unthinkable. It 
would put a premium upon judicial insincerity and sycophancy. 
Curtail the power of the judiciary if after full deliberation that 
seem to be wise, but never do anything to weaken the judge's 
independence, his immunity from responsibility for every act 
not legally or morally reprehensible. 

The problem is how, while retaining a tenure during good 
behavior, to insure prompt accountability and removability for 
cause. But the proposal to recall judges for unpopular de- 
cisions would, as President Taft has well said, be " nothing less 
than a proposal to abolish courts. To abolish courts is to 
abolish freedom. However innocent the motives of those who 
propose the measure, no deadlier blow was ever aimed at the 
heart of human liberty than this. The people have only to 
understand it to reject it." 

To those who will not heed President Taft's wise words, let 
me cite the opinions of a great English economist, statesman 
and political philosopher, John Stuart Mill. In his well 
known work, Considerations on Representative Government, Mr. 
Mill presented the following cogent and conclusive reasons 
against judicial recall ; 

If a judge could be removed from office by a popular vote , whoever 
was desirous of supplanting him would make capital for that pur- 

(155) 



I08 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 

pose out of all his judicial decisions ; would carry all of them , as far as 
he found practicable, by irregular appeal before a public opinion 
wholly incompetent, for want of having heard the case, or from having 
heard it without either the precautions or the impartiality belonging to 
judicial hearing ; would play upon popular passion and prejudice where 
they existed, and take pains to arouse them where they did not. And 
in this, if the case were interesting, and he took sufficient trouble, he 
would infallibly be successful, unless the judge or his friends descended 
into the arena, and made equally powerful appeals on the other side. 
Judges would end by feeling that they risked their office upon every 
decision they gave in a case susceptible of general interest, and that it 
was less essential for them to consider what decision was just, than what 
would be most applauded by the public, or would least admit of 
insidious misrepresentation. 

He thus presents the pith of the whole question : 

The question however, is whether in the peculiar position of a judge 
and supposing that all practicable securities have been taken for an 
honest appointment, irresponsibility, except to his own and the public 
conscience, has not on the whole less tendency to pervert his conduct 
than responsibility to the government or to a popular vote. 

To resort to judicial recall would be to flee to evils that we 
know not of. How many persons have tried to imagine what 
would be the procedure under such a system and how unlikely 
it is that a judge would be recalled upon the real issue? 
It would be unfortunate to have more questions thrust upon 
the people for determination when they already vote upon too 
large a number. Some critics of the bench think that the 
judges have become policy-determining officials. If so, recall 
would be no remedy. I have tried to point out some feasible 
methods which would avoid anything so ruinous as the recall 
of judges. If we set about it in earnest we can readily make 
impeachment or removability for cause such vital procedures in 
the elimination of improper judges that there will be no oc- 
casion for the recall. 

(156) 



DISCUSSION OF THE SELECTION AND REMOVAL 

OF JUDGES' 

Richard S. Childs, Secretary of the Short Ballot Organ- 
ization : 

As secretary of the Short Ballot Organization I have, of 
course been obliged to consider with great care the question of 
whether in the process of shortening the ballot and transferring 
minor elective offices to the appointive list, the judges also 
should be made appointive. The working rule which we use 
is this : When a given office is on the elective list, does it 
normally attract sufficient scrutiny to protect it from contamina- 
tion? There is no question as to whether the people ought 
to look more sharply at these offices. The question is, after 
two generations of trial, do they look sharply enough at the 
candidates for these offices to compel good nominations? We 
know that in the case of conspicuous officers like the governor 
or mayor, public scrutiny compels the politician to nominate 
better candidates than he wants to, better candidates than he 
does nominate for minor offices where he has his own way. 

Does it work this way with judges? I think not. I offer as 
a fair demonstration the case of the so-called judiciary nom- 
inators in New York city, who put a ticket of judges in the 
field a few years ago when the number of judges to be elected 
was unusually large and when such leadership as this should 
have been much in demand. The judiciary nominators put up 
a first-class ticket and practically the only votes received by 
their candidates were those secured through the endorsement 
of other parties. In spite of heavy advertising, in spite of a 
splendid ticket, they were unable to make a dent in the public 
consciousness in the matter of judicial nominations. An ad- 
verse report made by a bar association on a given nomination 
makes absurdly little difference in the election, and the report 
is forgotten in two days. My present audience, cultured and 

^At the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 25, 19 12. 

U57) 



I lo EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

intelligent as it is, contains only a small percentage of citizens 
who can name, to say nothing of describing, the judicial candi- 
dates of the several parties at the coming election. The average 
citizen does not know what judicial offices are to be filled or 
who the candidates are. 

The experiment of having judges on the elective list has 
therefore failed, inasmuch as it has led in practise to control 
by professional politicians rather than control by the people. 
The judges, therefore, must be taken off the elective list and 
made appointive by the people's governor, in order to bring 
their selection under popular control. The average radical 
will froth at the mouth at this suggestion, but he is wrong and 
I am right, — the appointive way insures closer popular con- 
trol than direct election does. Taft, Wilson and Roosevelt are 
all frankly in favor of the appointive rather than the elective 
method. 

Current popular discussion regarding the judiciary makes 
propaganda work for an appointive judiciary seem hopeless, 
and the short-ballot movement is contenting itself for the 
present with placing emphasis on the desirability of the selec- 
tion of minor administrative officers by appointment instead of 
election. 

There are two things that can be urged, I think, as hopeful 
compromises. There are two classes of judges, those who are 
expected to legislate and those who are not. The former are 
considered policy-determining officers, and in the minds of 
many people, should be kept elective, at least until the evolu- 
tion of something like the recall of decisions diminishes their 
policy-determining authority. There can be no argument, how- 
ever, about the non-legislating judges and magistrates, and the 
popular opposition to putting the New York city magistrates 
on the elective list, as proposed by the Sullivan bill of two 
years ago, shows that there is a possibility of getting popular 
support in making this class of judges appointive and taking 
them out of the hands of our present ruling class, the politicians. 

Another line of advance lies in the following suggestion. 
Let judges have a separate non-partisan column on the ballot. 
Impose upon the governor the duty of selecting a complete list 

(158) 



No. 2] SELECTION AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES 1 1 1 

of judicial candidates six weeks before the election and allow 
three weeks after that during which counter nominations may 
be made by petition by such voters as find reason for dissatis- 
faction with the governor's nomination, all the candidates' 
names to appear without the party label, except that opposite 
the governor's selections shall be the words, " recommended by 
the governor." This would have all the appearance of popular 
election, would give the people perfectly fair opportunity 
to nominate and elect when they felt it necessary to correct the 
governor and, without taking away any of the " privilege " 
of direct election of judges, would bring about practically an 
appointive system. 

Everett P. Wheeler, New York city: The method of 
judicial appointments is of great practical importance. 

A lawyer in good practise who has the confidence of his 
clients is measurably satisfied with his position and is not going 
to a caucus to get a political nomination, so he stays out. On 
the other hand, a governor who knows his duty will search for 
the best men. I have had extended experience, and I know 
you can get first-rate lawyers to take nominations for the 
bench if you seek them out, but they will not go into a cam- 
paign. It is perfectly true, as the last speaker said, that the 
average voter pays very little attention to his judiciary ticket. 
Years ago when Croker was the leader of Tammany, he took 
offense at Joseph F. Daly, who refused to vote for apportioning 
judicial sales to some of Croker's friends. Croker had influ- 
ence enough to prevent Daly's renomination. A few of us 
independents, in cooperation with the Republicans, nominated 
a ticket with three candidates, Mr. Daly, a Roman Catholic, 
Mr. Taft, the President's brother, a Protestant, and Mr. William 
N. Cohen, who had been on the bench temporarily, a Hebrew, 
and one of our very best lawyers. There was a representative 
ticket, a Roman Catholic, a Jew and a Protestant, all of them 
men of the first rank in their profession. And yet with all the 
campaigning we could do, and all the energy we could put into 
the fight, we lost that election. Had that been a matter of 
judicial selection there is no question that any governor would 

(159) 



112 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

have been disgraced to refuse to appoint these men as against 
those that were elected. 

Then again, since we are dealing with facts, pray allow a 
witness to speak from personal observation. I have been 
practising for fifty years at the bar, about half that time in the 
federal and half in state courts. I say without fear of contra- 
diction that on the whole the judges of the federal court are 
superior men and do more work than the judges of the state 
courts. I do not say there are not many men on the bench in 
the state courts who are the peers of the federal judges. But 
take them altogether they are distinctly inferior, and I think 
any lawyer with the same amount of experience will agree with 
me in this. The judges in the federal courts are appointed by 
the President to serve during good behavior. 

So much for the method of judicial appointment. As to the 
judicial recall, permit me to say as a result of my endeavor to 
keep in touch with the plain people, that it is my belief that the 
great majority of the plain people have no such distrust of the 
judges as has been assumed. You look at a storm on the sea, 
and think the whole body of water is convulsed, but this is not 
so ; it is only the surface ; below the surface it is calm. The 
sentiment expressed and described in Mary Antin's remarkable 
book, The Promised Land, is just and true ; our people love 
their country, are proud of their institutions, satisfied that 
more than any others they permit the prosperity of hard-work- 
ing industrious men. These are the men for whom gov- 
ernment is formed and they prosper under it, and it is es- 
sential that the rights of the individual should be protected 
against the tyranny or corruption of a temporary legislature. 
We have experienced that. In the old Georgia case there was 
offer of proof that a legislature was bribed ; the court said it 
could not look into it, but the fact was undoubted. There have 
been legislatures in my time that have passed acts for money 
consideration. The Senate of the United States found that the 
legislature of Illinois was bribed to elect Lorimer. It is to 
guard against such abuses that our constitution provides 
certain limitations to the power of the legislature. For the 
judge to have the decision recalled is to destroy his self- 

(i6o) 



No. 2] SELECTION AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES 113 

respect ; he would always know that the fight would have to be 
made at some time in a contest involving not his moral char- 
acter, but his success in a controversy. The knowledge that 
such a fight was imminent would be destructive of his inde- 
pendence. We have a remedy by impeachment for mis- 
conduct in office : in my time three judges have been im- 
peached in this state and removed from office. I do not object 
at all to the suggestion that the proceedings for that purpose 
be facilitated. I should be willing that the bar association, for 
instance, should present charges; they did so, in fact, in the 
cases I speak of. That is what the bar association of this city 
was originally organized for, to present charges against these 
three corrupt men. We got our hearing from the legislature, 
though it is true we had to go to the assembly first. Within 
a few years another such proceeding was taken at the instance 
of the state bar association. These things are quite within the 
competence of existing societies. If a judge is accused of 
corruption, he should be subject to removal, and there should 
also be provision for removing an incompetent judge. But 
if you put this matter into the hands of a group of voters, 
who may choose to bring up an issue, not of whether the judge 
has done wrong, but of whether the people want to get rid of 
him, you destroy the judge's independence, and preclude the 
possibility of getting independent and first-rate men on the 
bench. It seems to me that the adoption of judicial recall is 
destructive, and I look upon the men who advocate it as I do 
upon the men who fired on Fort Sumter. Believe, me, friends, 
if this should be adopted our distinctive system of government 
would be broken down and the security of individual rights of 
person and of property would be destroyed. 

Charles Hopkins Hartshorne, Jersey City : It may be of 
some interest to you to know that in the adjoining state of New 
Jersey we have more than one system of appointing judges. 
None are elected except justices of the peace. The judges of 
one of the strongest courts in the state are neither elected, nor 
appointed by the governor ; the judges of the court of chancery, 
or, as they are called, vice-chancellors, are appointed for terms 

8 (161) 



114 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

of seven years by the chancellor without any concurrent author- 
ity at all. The constitution of New Jersey provides that " the 
court of chancery shall consist of a chancellor," so that there 
may be legally no judge of that court except the chancellor; 
but some thirty years ago, when it was found that no one man 
could keep pace with the work of the court, a vice-chancellor 
was appointed by authority of a statute. The number has since 
been increased to seven. In theory, they are only referees, 
but in fact they exercise nearly all the functions of the chan- 
cellor, nearly all the powers of the court. The decrees of the 
court are signed by the chancellor in the form advised by them. 
No appeals lie from their decisions to the chancellor, but directly 
to the court of errors and appeals. The chancellor has found 
it necessary to select for his relief and the credit of his court 
the best men he could get for that office. I think, of all who 
have been appointed, there was only one who was not of ex- 
ceptional ability, and he held office only one term. As to the 
judges of the other superior courts, they are all appointed by 
the governor for terms of seven or five years. But there has 
grown up a practise that has become unwritten law, that a judge 
of the supreme court who is satisfactory shall be reappointed, 
and for so long as he gives satisfaction to the bar and the public. 
I think there has been no case within my memory where a judge 
of that court has failed of reappointment except from advanced 
age or illness, with the result that although their terms are for 
only seven years, we have had judges who have served for thirty 
years, and few who have served less than three or four terms, 
and if they have left then it has been because of their own wish 
or because of advanced age. The result of this practise has 
been a very satisfactory court. 

But when we come to the courts of common pleas, the county 
courts, the case is different. I am sorry to say appointments to 
them have been generally regarded as spoils of office. There 
has been this result, however, from the appointive system, that 
with one or two exceptions the judges, even of the county 
courts, have been entirely removed from politics. The senti- 
ment of the state is so strong against a judge mixing in politics 
that by mere force of that sentiment a judge finds himself com- 

(162) 



No. 2] SELECTION AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES 1 1 5 

pelled to withdraw from direct, and even from indirect, connec- 
tion with politics. From that point of view, at least, I think the 
appointive system has been successful. 

Edward D. Page, Oakland, N. J. : In raising the question as 
to whether there was widespread distrust of the courts, Mr. 
Wheeler injected a note of skepticism which I think it will be 
of value to continue, as this is one of the two points upon which 
the proposition of the recall of judges seems to be based. 
My own experience is that no such widespread distrust of the 
courts exists. Coming in contact with a great variety of people, 
both as a recorder in a New Jersey borough and in rather 
extensive civil litigation in the city of New York, as president 
of the Merchants' Protective Association, I am led to believe 
there is almost everywhere a most profound respect for the 
courts which penetrates the great inarticulate masses — the 
people who are not glib talkers anjl who rarely express their 
opinions in public. 

The only other point on which the advocacy of this remedy 
seems to be founded is that it would be an education for the 
people to be obliged to discuss and determine for themselves 
the decisions of law with which they may be dissatisfied. Is it 
not rather a large undertaking for the people at large to gain 
the necessary knowledge to inform their judgment so that they 
may intelligently express opinions about matters such as those 
who advocate the recall of judges or the recall of decisions 
would put before them? I think most people would rather not 
have such a responsibility put upon them, and I think that the 
real reason why there is now so little interest in the election of 
judges is that the voters realize that they do not possess the 
information necessary for them to express an intelligent opinion. 
They are, therefore, content to leave the matter in the hands of 
the men who make the nominations, following them because 
they have better judgment as to the qualifications of a judge. I 
think whenever you present a question which people know is 
beyond their judgment they will tend to rely on someone else, 
and if the boss seems the handiest man, they will naturally follow 
him. They certainly will follow the district leader, and he is 
always for the " ticket." 

(163) 



1 1 6 EFFICIENT GO VERNMENT 

It is a fallacy to believe that the recall is a new question. 
There was a democracy in Athens, where the recall of the 
judges prevailed. Was it not Aristides who, when the question 
of his recall was being voted on, sat beside the urn where the 
voters were casting their votes, and, asking a man who voted to 
ostracize him, " Do you know this Aristides? " got the answer, 
" No, but I am tired of hearing him called ' the Just.' " Socrates 
also was obliged to suffer the recall and to drink the hemlock 
because of the vague popular opinion against him. How can 
people who cannot possibly inform themselves be expected to 
express an opinion intelligently on such subjects? Are we 
ready as a democracy to present these questions to the whole 
body of voters? Can we trust a majority of them, no matter 
how much we believe in " the people," to express opinions in- 
telligently on subjects on which they cannot be informed? Are 
we not going rather rapidly with political experiment when we 
expect the mass of the people, as in Oregon, to read and digest 
a book of two hundred and fifty pages before they can express 
an opinion on the questions at issue in a single election? Are 
we ready to advocate that state of affairs, and may we not, in 
our zeal for democracy, destroy democracy by its own excess? 

(164) 



THE FEDERAL BUDGET: 

WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO DO BY WAY OF BUDGET 
MAKING FOR THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT ' 

FREDERICK A. CLEVELAND 



I 



AM assuming that you wish me to say something concrete 
about what the President is trying to do by way of budget 
making for the national government. 



The Presidenf s Inquiry into Economy and Efficiency 

The first step which was taken by the President looking 
toward a revision of methods of making and submitting esti- 
mates for the national government was in October, 1910. An 
appropriation of $100,000 had been made at his request 

to enable the President * * * to inquire more effectually into the 
methods of transacting public business * * * with a view to inaugurating 
new or changing old methods * * * so as to attain greater economy and 
efficiency therein * * *. 

A preliminary inquiry was first organized under Hon. Charles D. 
Norton, Secretary to the President. In mapping out the inquiry 
it was thought that the investigation of methods should bear on 
one or the other of two subjects, i. e., it should look toward 
more intelligent and more efficient "planning," or it should 
look toward the more efficient and economical " execution of 
plans." One of the first subjects to which attention was given, 
therefore, was the procedure relative to the making of estimates 
and appropriations — the subject of " planning " for the next 
year's business. 

The Appointment of a Commission of Experts to Report with 
Recommendatiojts 

March 8, 191 1, the President's Commission on Economy and 

* Read at the meeting of the Academy of PoHtical Science, October 26, 191 2. 

(165) 
8 • 



Il8 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

Efficiency was organized. This commission took over the work 
which had been begun under Mr. Norton, and, among other 
things, undertook to prepare a report on the need for a national 
budget. On June 19, 191 2, about fifteen months after the 
commission was organized, it submitted its report on this sub- 
ject with recommendations to the President.' 

The President Decides to Prepare and Submit a Budget 

As a first step toward providing the necessary means for 
locating both executive and legislative responsibility for the in- 
telligence and the efficiency with which plans are made, the 
commission recommended that the Executive should prepare 
and submit to Congress each year a prospectus of work to be 
undertaken, with an estimate of cost. The report of the com.- 
mission was approved and sent to Congress by special message 
June 27 last. On July 10 the President addressed a letter to 
each department head in which he said : 

It is my desire to send to Congress, at the same time that the Book of 
Estimates * * * is presented by the Secretary of the Treasury, a 
budget along the lines set forth in my message to Congress of June 27 
last. In order that this may be accomplished it will be necessary for 
the head of each executive department and other government establish- 
ment to prepare two sets of estimates and summaries of estimates, one 
in accordance with the present practise and one substantially in accord- 
ance with the forms contained in the report of the Commission on 
Economy and Efficiency, which was sent to Congress with my message. 

Attempt to Prevent Action of President 
The message with the report of the commission was laid be- 
fore Congress too late to receive formal consideration. The 
committee on appropriations took cognizance of the report 
and recommendations approved by the President as well as of 
his letter of July 10, and inserted in the revised draft of the 
legislative, executive, and judicial appropriation bill (the first 
bill having been vetoed), the following: 

^ " The A^eed for a National Budget ^ House Document 854, 62d Congress, 2d 
Session, 575 pp., transmitted to Congress by special message of the President, June 
27, 191 2, referred to the committee on appropriations, and ordered printed. 

(166) 



No. 2] THE FEDERAL BUDGET II9 

Sec. 9. That until otherwise provided by law, the regular annual esti- 
mates of appropriations for expenses of the government of the United 
States shall be prepared and submitted to Congress * * * only in the 
form and at the time now required by law, and in no other form and at 
no other time. 

The belated appropriation bill containing this clause was passed 
on August 24. Explaining the purpose of section 9, just 
quoted, the chairman of the committee on appropriations on 
the floor of the House, said : 

// was believed * * * that it would not be wise for Congress to abdicate, 
even by implication, its prerogative in this matter. A message from the 
President had already laid before Congress a very full and luminous ex- 
position of the proposed " national budget," and until it could be de- 
termined by careful and deliberate study of the scheme whether it 
should be accepted and adopted, it was not deemed wise or provident 
to have, as indicated in the public press, the time and energies of large 
numbers of the most capable persons in the several branches of the 
public service diverted to transforming the entire estimates for the next 
fiscal year into this new and imauthorized plan of a so-called national 
budget, to the neglect of their ordinary and pressing duties. 

The President Orders Heads of Departments to Cooperate in 
Preparing a Budget 
This statement was made by the chairman of the committee 
on appropriations on August 27., As the result of the con- 
fusion which followed, the President on September 19 sent to 
the Secretary of the Treasury and to each department head 
a letter, in which he again called attention to his instruction of 
July 10, and clearly set forth that, in his opinion, Congress 
could pass no law which would estop the President from obtain- 
ing from administrative officers such information as he may 
desire. The President's attitude in relation to the budget may 
best be expressed in his own language : 

Under the constitution the President is intrusted with the executive 
power and is responsible for the acts of heads of departments and their 
subordinates as his agents, and he can use them to assist him in his 
constitutional duties, one of which is to recommend measures to Congress 
and to advise it as to the existing conditions and their betterment. ♦ * * 

(167) 



I20 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

If the President is to assume any responsibility for either the manner 
in which business of the government is transacted or results obtained, 
it is evident that he cannot be limited by Congress to such information 
as that branch may think sufficient for his purposes. In my opinion, // 
is entirely competent for the President to submit a budget, and Congress 
can not forbid or prevent it. It is quite within his duty and power to 
have prepared and to submit to Congress and to the country a state- 
ment of resources, obligations, revenues, expenditures, and estimates in 
the form he deems advisable. And this power I propose to exercise. 

In order that there might be no mistake with respect to the 
duty of administrative officers, the President further said : 

In conclusion, therefore, my instruction is to print and send to Congress 
the forms of estimates required by it of officers, without delay ; also to 
have sent to me the information asked for in my letter of July lO, igi2. 
This will be made the basis for review, revision, and summary state- 
ment in the form of a budget vi\\h supporting documents which may be 
sent to Congress by special message as the proposal of the adminis- 
tration. 

I have given to you this short historical sketch of what has hap- 
pened at Washington, in order to clear the way for a discussion 
of the proposals of the President so far as these relate to fixing 
both executive and legislative responsibility for the inefficiency 
and waste due to lack of intelligence in making and approving 
plans for work to be undertaken and due to conditions attached 
to appropriations which make it difficult to execute plans after 
they have been approved. 

Budget Procedure Recommended by the Commission 

As related to the location of responsibility, the budget pro- 
cedure which is recommended by the commission is as follows: 

1. That preliminary bureau estimates should be prepared by 
the technical experts in charge of the work — thereby making 
available to the cabinet officer and to the President the infor- 
mation and the opinions of those who are in a position to under- 
stand both the character of the work to be done and the practical 
conditions to be met. 

2. That these preliminary bureau estimates should be submit- 

(i68) 



No. 2j THE FEDERAL BUDGET 12 1 

ted first to department heads — in order that the cabinet officer 
as departmental executive may consider the request of each 
bureau in relation to the work of the department as a whole, 

3. That preliminary departmental estimates, having thus been 
prepared by bureau heads and reviewed by the cabinet officer 
in charge, should then be submitted to the President with the 
recommendations of the cabinet officer. 

4. That the President should then have the preliminary de- 
partmental estimates and the recommendations of the heads of 
departments compiled and analyzed by someone representing 
him as Chief Executive — in order that the requests of each 
bureau and the recommendations of each cabinet officer may 
be readily understood and considered in perspective, 

5. This having been done, the President, with his cabinet, 
would consider each request and recommendation for the pur- 
pose of deciding what the President as the responsible head of 
the administration shall submit to Congress as a request for 
appropriations, and what changes in law will be asked for to 
enable the Executive to transact the business of the government 
with greatest economy and efficiency. 

6. Final conclusion as to what the administration will stand 
for having been reached, not only with respect to requests for 
appropriations, but also with respect to methods of financing, 
these conclusions would be summarized in the form of a definite 
budget which would be sent to Congress and at the same time 
laid before the country through the President as the constitu- 
tional head of the administration. 

Essential Differences Between the Present and the Proposed 

Method 

The differences between the method at present employed and 
the plan proposed by the President in his special message of 
June 27 last are these: 

First : At the present time Congress, by law, requires the 
many heads of departments and establishments to report esti- 
mates to Congress direct without providing for revision or re- 
view by the President. The President takes the position that it will 
not only locate responsibility for proposals made, but will add 

(169) 



122 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

very materially to the eflficiency of the executive branch of the 
government if plans for future work be prepared by heads of 
bureaus and establishments as the subordinates of the President 
who, under the constitution, is made responsible for their acts. 
Among the results which it is thought that this change in 
method would accomplish are these : 

It would improve discipline by making heads of bureaus 
and offices feel a more direct responsibility to superiors. 
It would establish greater solidarity and unanimity of 
official actions, in that it would bring departmental offi- 
cers into more direct dealing with the President. 
It would give to executive officers a greater sense of re- 
sponsibility in the making of plans for future work as 
well as in the consideration of results of past work, which 
would be reported as a basis for legislative consideration 
of the budget submitted. 
Executive heads, knowing that they would be called upon 
by the President to render a strict account of steward- 
ship, would take their responsibility for supervision and 
control more seriously ; they would insist on having the 
information made available which is necessary to enable 
them to think about the business of the department and 
to confer intelligently with the President about it. 
It would do away very largely with personal politics and 
" understandings" as a means of obtaining funds for the 
support of bureau and local activities. 
It would require the officer in charge of a bureau or sub- 
division to depend on his superior instead of constantly 
circumventing him — in many instances working openly 
against him — in order that he may find more favorable 
standing with members of Congress. 
It would make necessary the keeping of records and the 
making of reports, instead of having the plans of work 
decided in a committee room behind closed doors on 
oral statements of persons in charge of work, statements 
based on personal experience and carefully guarded as 
the stock in trade of the officer or the committeeman. 
Second : At the present time the preliminary estimates of 

(170) 



No. 2l THE FEDERAL BUDGET 1 23 

departments are sent to the Secretary of the Treasury, who acts 
as an editor and messenger for Congress. The President takes 
the position that it will not only locate responsibility, but will add 
much both to the economy and to the efficiency with which plans 
are made for future work, if these plans are submitted to Con- 
gress and to the country by the President with such supporting 
data as may be necessary to the consideration of every question 
of public policy which is involved. 

Among the results which it is thought that this change in 
jnethod would accomplish are the following: 

It would require that the President, with his cabinet, shall 
carefully consider every detail necessary in view of the ex- 
ecutive responsibility for proposals made, before they 
are submitted. 
It would reiquire that the information with respect to past 
work of the government as well as the information with 
respect to work to be undertaken, should be in such de- 
tail and so classified and summarized as will enable the 
President and his cabinet to consider every question of 
public policy relating to work proposed before submitting 
the budget. 
This information having been collected for the benefit of 
the President and the heads of departments, would be 
available for Congress and for the public. 
Third : At the present time Congress assumes responsibility 
for submitting the first formal proposal for financing future 
work, as a result of which it is necessary for it to submit the 
preliminary estimates to committees who, in the nature of things, 
cannot report until near the end of the session. The President 
takes the position that it will not only place responsibility where 
it belongs, but will add materially to the information of Con- 
gress and to the efficiency of the executive branch of the Gov- 
ernment to have a definite, concrete, well-considered, under- 
standable request for appropriations, with recommendations as 
to methods of financing laid before Congress at the time it 
convenes. 

Among the results which it is thought that this change in 
method would accomplish are these : 

(171) 



124 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Hi 

Those who are asked to prepare preliminary estimates 
would do so knowing that they were deaHng with their 
official superiors and therefore would be under the 
necessity of dealing frankly and open-handedly with 
them. They would also have every inducement to give 
to such officers the best information with respect to each 
proposal submitted as a means of enabling their official 
superiors to represent them most ably. 

Knowing that their estimates as well as the recommenda- 
tions of heads of departments would be considered by 
the President, there would be the same motive as at 
present for each bureau head to advance the claims of 
his service, and there would be the added advantage of 
having the conclusion reached in conference made a part 
of an executive program which could be thought about 
and understood by the country as well as by individual 
members of Congress. 

Instead of being required to wait until committees on ap- 
propriations had reported before questions of changes 
in organic law recommended by heads of bureaus and 
departments could be considered, these questions would 
be laid before Congress at the beginning of the session ; 
this would enable Congress to refer these requests to 
proper committees and to have action taken on their 
recommendations while the committees on appropri- 
ations were at work on the estimates. 

Instead of being put to the necessity of loading up the bills 
prepared by regular committees on appropriations with 
" riders," because there is no time remaining for inde- 
pendent consideration, the committees on appropria- 
tions could formulate their bills on the action taken by 
Congress on each subject submitted for constructive leg- 
islation at the beginning of each session. 

When the committee on appropriations reported its con- 
clusions in the form of a bill, each member of Congress 
and the country as a whole would be in a position to 
form an intelligent opinion about the significance of its 
recommendations, since the same information would be 

available to all. 

(172) 



No. 2] THE FEDERAL BUDGET 1 25 

Instead of having hundreds of millions of dollars voted 
away by Congress within a single day, without question 
raised by any member on the floor, appropriation bills 
would necessarily be discussed at length, as they would 
also be discussed by the press and through other 
agencies of publicity. 
Fourth : At the present time the conditions attached to ap- 
propriations are such as to rob the government and the country 
of benefits to be derived through the exercise of executive dis- 
cretion with respect to questions of business that cannot be 
properly considered a "year ahead of their occurrence. The 
President takes the position that it will not only locate responsi- 
bility where it belongs, but it will add very much to the efficiency 
and economy with which business is done, if the conditions at- 
tached to appropriations are limited to questions of general 
policy and do not hamper the officer in the use of judgment 
with respect to the details of work to be done. 

Among the results which it is thought that this change in 
method would accomplish are these : 

Upon the information which is submitted with the budget, 
and such further information as may be developed 
through legislative inquiry after the submission of the 
budget, Congress would assume responsibility for decid- 
ing what work should be done ; what should be the or- 
ganization provided for doing work ; what amounts or 
funds should be voted. 
Congress would also assume responsibility for deciding 
what conditions should be attached to appropriations as a 
matter of general law. 
Subject to these conditions of general law, the head of 
each department would assume responsibility for decid- 
ing how the money should be spent, to the end that he 
might use his organization and do the work for which he 
was made responsible, with greatest economy and 
efficiency. 
By giving to the Executive the right to decide what is best 
adapted to the accomplishment of a given end, i. e., 
what shall be purchased or contracted for, what prices 
(173) 



J 26 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

shall be paid — by requiring that the responsible officer 
shall render an account that will reflect the efficiency of 
each employe as well as of his organization as a whole, 
and the economy with which expenditures are made — 
the cost of doing public business may be very materially 
reduced, and the character of the service rendered cor- 
respondingly improved. 
Fifth : At the present time there is no adequate means pro- 
vided for locating executive responsibility for inefficiency and 
waste. The President takes the position that the plan proposed 
will locate executive responsibility not only for the efficiency 
with which plans are made, but also for the economy and 
efficiency with which plans are executed. 

The means proposed for locating executive responsibility for 
the efficiency and economy with which plans are made, and the 
work authorized is executed, are as follows : 

Congress should attach to all funds appropriated, as a 
provision of general law, the following conditions : 

(a) that before any part of any appropriation or fund 
is encumbered or expended, allotments to subor- 
dinates for work to be undertaken by them shall be 
made ; 

(b) that each allotment shall be based on estimates 
prepared by officers in charge of the work ; 

(c) that estimates prepared as a basis for allotment 
shall be expressed in the same detail as expendi- 
ture accounts are required to be kept and reported ; 

(d) that in case the estimate is for work of a char- 
acter which has heretofore been carried on, it shall 
be supported by comparative expenditure data ; 

(e) that the estimates prepared as a basis for allot- 
ment be submitted to the heads of the department 
or establishment to which the appropriation runs ; 

(f) that the estimates for allotments thus prepared 
and submitted shall be considered by the head of 
the department in relation to the amount and pur- 
pose of the appropriation which has been made 
available ; 

(174) 



No. 2] THE FEDERAL BUDGET 12/ 

(g) that after the requests for allotments have been 
so considered and decision is reached that an allot- 
ment shall be made, an advice of allotment setting 
forth the amount alloted for each purpose shall be 
formally executed and made a matter of public 
record ; 

(h) that as a means of giving publicity to the allot- 
ment so made a copy shall be sent to the depart- 
m.ent of the treasury for the information of the 
auditor, and also a copy to the clerk of each house 
for the information of Congress ; 

(i) that whenever it may seem desirable to rescind 
or modify any allotment, these rescindments or 
modifications shall be made in the same formal 
manner; 

(j) that fund accounts shall be kept in such manner 
as to show : ( i ) the allotments and unallotted bal- 
ances of appropriations, (2) the encumbrances and 
the unencumbered balances of appropriations and 
allotments, (3) the unexpended balances of appro- 
priations, (4) the balance still subject to requisitions 
for cash and (5) the available balance in the hands 
of disbursing officers ; 

(k) that expenditure accounts be so kept as to show : 
(i) the cost by allotments, by jobs or subdivis- 
ions of work under allotments and (2) that each of 
these be kept and reported in such an analysis as 
would show the amount expended for salaries and 
wages, supplies, materials and other articles, or 
objects of expenditure in the manner prescribed by 
the comptroller of the treasury, in order that the 
information produced may be summarized and re- 
capitulated for each service, for each department, 
and for the government as a whole. 
By requiring each executive head to assume responsibility for 
saying how he proposes to spend his appropriations before any 
action is taken, and by requiring him to keep an up-to-date 
analysis of expenditures which will show how the money has 

(175) 



128 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

been spent, as well as the character of results which have been 
obtained, and by making both the "fund accounts" and the 
"expenditure accounts" public records to which any one who 
may be interested may have access (subject to such reasonable 
rules as may be prescribed for the protection of the office), by 
providing further for a system of reporting which will make 
these facts regularly available to executive officers and period- 
ically available to the public, any attempted subversion, any 
result which may show inefficiency in the organization, any 
waste which may be due to lack of proper attention or super- 
vision, would be a matter which no chief executive could afford 
to overlook. 

Should it happen that an executive officer desired to use 
funds wastefully or in a manner not intended, the President 
could not afford to assume responsibility for his action or con- 
tinuation in the service. Nor would Congress be lacking in the 
means necessar}'- to protect the best interests of the public, if the 
evidence necessary for locating executive responsibility were at 
all times at hand. 

This is the alternative proposed to the present method of 
transacting public business behind closed doors and in the dark, 
the legislative branch dealing with the executive branch as 
under suspicion, the administrative officer withholding informa- 
tion from Congress and the public on the theory that he is to be 
placed on trial and must appear as a witness for his own prose- 
cution — therefore the less said the better. 

Proposals of the President Based on Common Experience and 

Common Sense 

These proposals of the President are based on common ex- 
perience and common sense. They are supported by the best 
judgment and the best experience which has been gained in 
organization and management of corporate bodies, both public 
and private. While officers of a private corporation are not or- 
dinarily limited by law in such manner as to make it necessary 
for them to act under formal appropriations, it is the ordinary 
method of transacting business to have the president of a corpo- 
ration lay before the board, at its annual meeting, a report 

(1/6) 



No. 2] THE FEDERAL BUDGET 1 29 

which is also made available to citizens or stockholders ; it is 
common experience for the president, as the responsible head 
of the executive branch, to set forth what has been done during 
the past year and what it is proposed that the corporation should 
do during the next year ; it is common experience for the presi- 
dent, as the head of the administration, to accompany his pro- 
posals with estimates ; it is common experience for the execu- 
tive, as the head of the administration, to submit estimates with 
recommendations as to how proposed expenditures shall be 
financed. These data are submitted to the board and made 
available to the public or the stockholders as a basis for con- 
sideration before authorization is given to go ahead. On the 
basis of the report submitted as well as the proposals made 
the president of a corporation expects to obtain the support 
and cooperation of the board, in so far as his record may en- 
title him to support and his report and proposal may in their 
judgment accord with the ends and purposes of the institution 
which they represent. When the proposal of the executive is 
thus clearly stated, responsibility for action taken is definitely 
located. In case there is a division of opinion between the 
board and the executive, their differences are clearly defined 
and may be acted upon by stockholders or citizens, as the 
case may require. It would be little less than insane for the 
trustees of a private corporation, as the representatives of stock- 
holders, to pass a by-law requiring that each department and 
division head should report to the board direct what he thought 
ought to be done with the estimates of costs, without having 
these matters first passed upon by his executive superior. 
Under such circumstances the board could not expect to act 
on the best advice ; what they could expect and invariably would 
receive would be proposals for expansion and corresponding 
proposals for expenditures that would bear no relation to the 
ability of the corporation to finance them. Such a requirement 
is just as adverse to intelligent planning and to the economic 
execution of pla?is in government work as it would be if im- 
posed by the board on a private corporation. It is this method 
that the President is undertaking to supplant. 

(177) 



130 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

The Budget as a Means of Locating Congressional Responsibility 
Having before them a definite statement as to what it is that 
the President assumes responsibility for, having before them the 
brief of the administration supporting each proposal, then the 
responsibility of the members of Congress would be just as 
clearly marked. As each member would have before him at 
the beginning of the session a statement of facts about each 
question in which he or his constituency may be interested, 
each member and each committee would be in a position at 
once to go into each item or question submitted, and in case 
any detail necessary to complete understanding was lacking, to 
ask that this detail be supplied. The effect of such a proposal 
as is made by the President would be to make each member of 
Congress free to think, to speak and to vote as he chooses on 
each proposition for which the President assumes responsi- 
bility; he would be able to act independently instead of being 
led around by the nose by some one, or some few, who may 
have a monopoly of information. But while each member is 
thinking and speaking and voting, citizens may likewise be 
thinking; the press may be speaking; the constituency of each 
member may be busy " instructing their representative " as to 
which proposals of the administration or of Congress are at 
variance with their views. 

One proposal of the President deserves special consideration, 
viz., that in case Congress sees fit to bring in new measures — 
measures requiring appropriations not contemplated in the 
budget submitted by the President — such measures shall be 
submitted as a separate bill, instead of being injected as a 
" rider" on the regular bill. The advantage of such a proposal 
is obvious. It puts responsibility where it belongs. It gives to 
the President the same opportunity to consider and act inde- 
pendently on proposals for appropriations originating in Con- 
gress that Congress has with respect to proposals originating 
with the administration. 

The Difficulties which Lie in the Way of the President 
In giving this enlarged interpretation to executive responsi- 
bility under the constitution, President Taft has undertaken a 

(178) 



No. 2] THE FEDERAL BUDGET 1 3 1 

task the difficulties of which can scarcely be comprehended. 
Not only has the government never had a budget, but it has 
never had a balance sheet ; it has never had an operation ac- 
count ; it has never known how it stood financially ; it has never 
had any means for reviewing its contracting and purchasing 
relations ; it has never had the information necessary for con- 
sidering questions of economy and efficiency of service ren- 
dered. As a safeguard against ignorance and official irresponsi- 
bility, the service has been bound up in a mass of red tape that 
makes efficient management impossible. Instead of being able 
to base his proposals on accounts and reports such as are 
ordinarily available to a corporate executive, the President is 
put to the extremity of requiring re-analyses of all the transac- 
tions of the past two years. He is also put to the necessity of 
having the estimates prepared on entirely new lines. This 
could not be done before the last fiscal year was completed — 
July I. The mass of detail which must be analyzed and sum- 
marized is only suggested when we consider that the Govern- 
ment is engaged in practically every kind of undertaking known 
to private concerns, and on a scale that puts executive attention 
and judgment to the severest test. That the first budget sub- 
mitted cannot be all that may be desired is certain ; but if, 
through this first submission, the people of the United States 
have laid before them a picture of what it is that Congress is 
asked to finance, and if the way be pointed out for locating re- 
sponsibility for failure to provide adequately for welfare needs, 
an end will have been achieved that will make it as impossible 
to continue to do business by the methods that have obtained 
as it would be for the American people to revert to coach and 
pillion after the introduction of the railroad and the automobile. 

(179) 



EFFICIENT ORGANIZATION OF THE PERSON- 
NEL IN ADMINISTRATION' 

W. F. WILLOUGHBY 
Professor of Jurisprudence and Politics, Princeton University 

MY discussion of this topic will be confined entirely to a 
consideration of the problem as it presents itself in 
our national government, though most of the points 
raised and lines of action urged are, it is believed, of more 
general application. 

The subject of the government personnel may be considered 
from a number of viewpoints : 

( 1 ) That of improvement of our political institutions and 
purification of politics. 

(2) That of justice between individual citizens in respect to 
opportunities for entrance into the government service, and of 
advancement after entrance according to personal merit. 

(3) That of efficiency, or securing the maximum return 
in work done for expenditures made for remuneration of per- 
sonal service. 

In a general way these three manners of viewing the question 
may be said to be those of looking at the problem from 
the standpoint of: (i) the general public, (2) the employe 
and (3) the employer. 

It is my purpose to approach this important question of 
efficiency in administration from the third of these standpoints 
— that of the employer, the hard dollars-and-cents point of 
view of getting the most for your money. 

The personnel of the government may, for purposes of con- 
sideration, be divided into three classes: (i) Subordinate 
positions. (2) Directing personnel at Washington. (3) Field 
positions. 

In respect to the first of these, the selection of entrants to the 

* Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 26, 191 2. 

(180) 



THE PERSONNEL IN ADMINISTRATION 



133 



service through some form of examination, competitive where 
feasible, has now come to be the accepted method of determining 
merit or fitness. As regards this class and their method of 
entrance into the service, the battle for the merit system may 
be said to be almost over. There are many other problems, 
however, connected with securing efficiency in respect to this 
class of public servants that still remain to be solved. The so- 
called " apportionment principle," in accordance with which the 
effort is made to distribute appointments among the several 
states in proportion to their population, is vicious in theory and 
detrimental in practice. It means the payment of higher salaries 
than are necessary, since a greater remuneration must be of- 
fered to induce competent personS; to come from distant points 
to Washington at their own expense. It means that such per- 
sons leave their homes, where their expenses of living are lower 
than they are in Washington, where they must make independ- 
ent provision for quarters and board. It means, further, that 
the more efficient will be passed over in favor of the less 
efficient, simply because the latter happen to hail from states 
whose quotas are not filled. 

Again, scarcely a beginning has been made toward the estab- 
lishment in the several services at Washington of proper effi- 
ciency tests through which the work of individuals may be con- 
trolled and ratings for promotion prepared. The classification 
of employes and the adjustment of compensation to character 
of work performed are defective in the extreme. No scheme 
has as yet been put into practise for retiring superannuated em- 
ployes, though the adoption of a proper plan for accomplishing 
this is a sine qua non if an efficient personnel is to be secured. 
This last matter has received especial attention at the hands of 
the Commission on Economy and Efficiency. That commission 
has submitted a report outlining a plan which it believes will 
fully meet the needs of the situation. This report has been 
transmitted to Congress by the President with his hearty en- 
dorsement. 

I will pass over these matters touching the subordinate per- 
sonnel with this mere mention, as I desire to devote my atten- 
tion to certain problems connected with the other two classes, 

(181) 
9 • 



134 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

the directing personnel at Washington and the persons in field 
positions, as these classes have received little or no attention at 
the hands of the public and it is desirable that they should at 
least be brought forward in meetings of the character of the 
present one. 

In respect to the first of these two groups, the directing 
personnel at Washington, scarcely a beginning has been made 
toward the adoption of the merit principle as the determining 
factor in selecting persons for appointment. All of these posi- 
tions, by which are meant such positions as assistant secretaries 
of departments and chiefs and assistant chiefs of bureaus, 
by whom, under the President and the nine Secretaries, the real 
work of directing the government services is performed, are now 
with few exceptions appointed by the President by and with 
the advice and consent of the Senate, mostly for terms of four 
years. As such they are, in conformity with civil-service rule 
II, adopted in 1902, excluded from the classified competitive 
service of the United States. 

I have no hesitation in saying that in my opinion this condi- 
tion constitutes one of the most serious defects in our govern- 
mental machinery as bearing upon the matter of efficiency 
of personnel, and that its continued existence militates strongly 
against securing the maximum of efficiency and economy in 
the administration of public affairs to which the country is 
entitled. I say this notwithstanding the fact that it is difficult 
to contradict the statement that these positions of assistant 
secretaries, chiefs and assistant chiefs of bureaus are in general 
held by an efficient and, for the most part, technically qualified 
body of men. 

My objection to the present system is not that honest and 
capable men have not been secured under it for these important 
positions. But these positions should be made a part of the 
general classified service in respect to which permanency of 
tenure during good behavior and a satisfactory performance of 
duty prevails, and appointment to which is nominally by pro- 
motion within the particular service in which the vacancies 
occur, or within the government service generally, and failing 

(182) 



No. 2] THE PERSONNEL IN ADMINISTRATION 135 

this by some selective process that will test the capacity of the 
persons not in the government service who are considered for 
appoiniment. Until these principles are definitely put into 
practise it is impossible to secure that well-balanced service and 
esprit de corps running from the top to the bottom in the ser- 
vices individually and in the government service generally that 
must exist if the best work is to be obtained. 

It will be seen that the point upon which I lay emphasis in 
thus urging that these higher administrative positions at Wash- 
ington be made an integral part of the permanent classified 
service of the government is the beneficial effect that such 
action will have upon the service generally. Only in secondary 
degree do I attach importance to the consideration of securing 
a higher class and more technically competent corps of officials 
for these positions. 

At the present time what amounts to a deadline is drawn at 
the positions of chief clerk and chief of division, the prevailing 
salaries for which are $2,000, $2,500, and $3,000. Up to this 
point the government employe may look upon his service as 
one in which he may hope for advancement as he shows merit. 
Beyond this lie the positions of the real directing heads, the 
positions that constitute the posts that are really worth while, 
indeed the only ones offering an effective incentive to per- 
sons to adopt the government service as a career. Remove 
this barrier, make it possible to pass as a matter of normal 
promotion from the position of chief of division to assistant 
chief of bureau, chief of bureau and assistant secretary, and 
the government service at once becomes one offering a real 
career. Not merely will action in: this way afford to the am- 
bitious attractions to enter the service that do not now exist, 
but a strong stimulus will be given to persons in the service 
to discharge their duties efficiently and, by study and research, 
to fit themselves for the discharge of the duties pertaining 
to the superior positions. 

Under this system when a vacancy occurs in an important po- 
sition, such, for example, as that of assistant secretary or chief 
of a bureau, the appointing power — the Secretary or the Presi- 
dent — will canvass the qualifications of the chiefs of divisions in 

(183) 



136 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

the particular service affected. If just the right man :'s not 
found within such service the qualifications of persons holding 
important positions in other services engaged in analogous lines 
of work will next be scrutinized. Only after it is found that a 
man having the qualifications desired cannot be obtained within 
the government service will resort be had to persons outside the 
service. In this case selection will be made through some selec- 
tive process such as is represented by a competitive examina- 
tion. There can be little reason to doubt that resort to this 
latter method will be had only in exceptional cases, since the 
appointing powers will certainly prefer 1:o select one whose 
qualifications and personal characteristics are definitely known 
rather than to run the risk involved in* holding an open com- 
petitive examination. There will, however, be a few cases, 
where highly technical or specialized qualifications are desired, 
where the administration will want to go outside the govern- 
ment service. Indeed a case will now and then occur where the 
services of a particular individual are desired, and where resort 
will be had to the power of the President to except such 
specific appointment from the general rules. 

This proposition that the higher directing personnel at 
Washington up to, but of course not including, the Secretaries 
of the Departments, was strongly urged by the Commission on 
Economy and Efl[iciency in its report to the President on 
methods of appointment, which report was transmitted by the 
President with his approval to Congress. 

From this consideration of the directing personnel at Wash- 
ington, I wish now to turn to the third of the three groups 
into which, for purposes of consideration, I have divided the 
government personnel. This group constitutes what is known 
in government circles as the field services or field establishments 
as distinct from the departments at Washington. 

It is a common mistake for persons unconsciously to take 
the position that the work of conducting the affairs of the 
nation is performed at Washington. Nothing could be further 
from the fact. The real work is done at the thousands of 
points scattered throughout the country at which are located 

(184) 



No. 2] THE PERSONNEL IN ADMINISTRATION 137 

the post offices, the custom houses, the offices of collectors of 
internal revenue, the Indian reservations, the national forests 
and the like. The work done at Washington is for the most 
part but that of a central office for general administration, with 
but twenty or thirty thousand employes out of a total of three 
hundred or four hundred thousand. 

All that has been said regarding covering superior adminis- 
trative positions at Washington under the classified service, 
making these positions permanent and establishing the practise 
of filling them through promotions, applies with equal force to 
these field positions. The headships of these field services, 
thousands in number, are now treated as political offices. It is 
unnecessary for me to state that there is nothing of a political 
nature in their duties. Their functions are purely administra- 
tive and, until they are so regarded, anything approaching a 
really economical administration of their offices is impossible. 

It is difficult to realize the full importance of the changes 
that would result if the recent recommendation to Congress by 
the President, that all these positions, high and low, be covered 
under the classified service, were carried out. It is probable 
that to most persons the significance of the action here recom- 
mended is simply that of taking the civil service once for all 
out of politics. It would do that, and that would be an 
enormous gain. This, however, would be but the beginning 
of the good that would result. From the standpoint of 
efficient administration it would lay the basis for a complete 
reorganization of the several services that would be revolution- 
ary in character. 

I believe that there are few persons who appreciate the fact 
that at the present time there do not exist, and under present 
conditions cannot exist, real national services for the administra- 
tion of these important civil establishments. By national service 
I mean one in which each employe is a unit in a general scheme, 
instead of a unit in a personnel scheme for the particular 
office in which he is employed, one in which transfers and promo- 
tions can freely take place from one unit to another as merit 
warrants and the interests of the service as a whole dictate. 
It is only necessary to contrast conditions now prevailing in 

(185) 



138 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

a service which has been nationalized, so to speak, such as the 
consular or diplomatic service, with those prevailing in the 
postal service, the customs service or the internal revenue 
service, which are still on the localized basis, to appreciate the 
differences between the two from an administrative standpoint. 

In the consular and diplomatic services the theory is — and 
practise is more and more conforming to this theory — that 
each officer and employe is a member of a single unified ser- 
vice. When a person enters either of these services in a sub- 
ordinate capacity he can look forward to advancement, if he 
merits it, anywhere within the entire service. On the other 
hand the government, as soon as it finds an officer or employe 
doing good work in a subordinate position, can secure the great 
advantage that will result from his transfer to a more important 
position. Much the same conditions obtain in the public 
health and marine hospital service of the Treasury Department. 
Under this system each employe is under a constant incentive 
to give his very best efforts to the performance of his work 
and by study to fit himself for more responsible positions. 
The development of an esprit de corps, efficiency and faithful- 
ness follows almost as a matter of course. 

Compare this with conditions as they exist, and as pointed out, 
must inevitably exist under present conditions as regards appoint- 
ments in the great services — the post ofTice, customs, internal 
revenue, and many others that might be mentioned — which 
represent so large a part of the administrative activities of the 
government. In these services each field station is treated almost 
as a local office to be managed, as far as personnel is concerned, 
as a detached enterprise. Its directing head in practically all 
cases is not only appointed from among residents of the district, 
but the real selection is made, not by the directing head of the 
service but by the local representative of the district in Con- 
gress or on the governing board of the party organization. 
Only in exceptional cases is a vacancy now filled by promotion 
from the ranks. Practically never is the head of a station who 
has proved his competence transferred to a more important 
post in the service. To make matters still worse, appointments 
to these positions are made for the most part for terms of but 

(i86) 



No. 2] THE PERSONNEL IN ADMINISTRATION 139 

four years. In like manner the subordinate personnel, even 
though they are selected through competitive civil service ex- 
aminations, are for the most part taken from the district in which 
the station is located and they have little or no prospect of pro- 
motion except within the particular station to which they are 
attached. Even here they are debarred from any reasonable 
expectation of rising to the top as a result of faithful and 
conscientious discharge of their duties. 

It is difficult to conceive of a scheme of organization better 
adapted to deprive a personnel of incentive for good work, to 
stifle ambition for advancement within the service, or to tie the 
hands of a central administration desiring to put its service 
upon a really efficient basis. No private enterprise would 
undertake to conduct its affairs upon any such basis for a 
moment. Not the first beginning is made toward treating the 
services as offering permanent careers to their personnel. No 
pretense is made of building up a corps of directing officers 
representing a selection of the most capable. Were efficiency 
really sought, can there be any question that if a vacancy were 
to occur in such a position as that of collector of the port of 
New York, the administration would fill it by promoting to it 
some collector who has done efficient work at a less responsible 
post, and so on down the line? Except in respect to the sub- 
ordinate personnel and then only within very narrow limits, no 
emphasis is laid upon efficiency in the performance of duty. 

In urging the desirability of giving permanence to the higher 
personnel of the field services and of placing those services 
upon a really national basis as regards organization and per- 
sonnel, I am not basing my argument merely upon theoretical 
considerations. Some twelve years ago it was my good fortune 
to be sent to Porto Rico as the treasurer of that island. Among 
the various duties that I had to perform in that capacity was 
the collection of the general property tax. For that purpose 
the island was divided into sixty-six districts corresponding to 
the sixty-six municipal districts into which for purposes of 
local administration the island had been divided. At the head 
of each district was a collector of taxes. The theory upon 
which this service was organized was that now obtaining in 

(187) 



I40 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

respect to most of the field services of the national government 
here. Each office was a local service. There was practically 
no such thing as a man moving from one office to another. I 
changed all this. I nationalized or rather unified the ser- 
vice. I arranged the several districts in classes according to 
their importance and made a scale of remuneration for the col- 
lectors in charge running from $480 per annum in the case of 
the least important to $2000 in the case of the most important. 
There are probably eight or ten classes between these. I then 
established the practise of filling superior positions strictly by 
promotion and for merit. A man entered the service as col- 
lector at a small town with a salary of but $480 per annum. 
If efficient he was transferred from post to post until the higher 
positions were reached. The result more than justified my 
greatest expectations. A genuine esprit de corps was developed. 
The collectors knew that promotions depended upon their col- 
lecting the taxes and performing their other duties properly. 
The result was that when I left the treasurership some six years 
later, uncollected or delinquent taxes for the island as a whole 
were less than two per cent. I doubt whether there is any 
state that can show an equally good record. 

Later, as secretary of the island, the task fell to me of draft- 
ing a revised police law. In Porto Rico the policing of the 
island is done by a single insular police force of about eight 
hundred men. Having in mind the success following the 
unifying of the tax collection service, I adopted the same prin- 
ciple in preparing my draft. The island was divided into sixty- 
six districts corresponding to the municipal districts into which, 
as stated, the island is divided, and a district chief was placed 
in charge of each. These were arranged in a hierarchy with 
graduated salaries precisely as was the tax collection force, and 
the same principle of filling positions by promotion from less 
important posts was adopted. Equally favorable results were 
obtained from this law. A m^an now enters the police service 
as a permanent career. He knows that he can be advanced 
from post to post as he merits such promotion. From the 
standpoint of the government the responsible positions are as 
a matter of course filled by men whose competence has been 
proved in lower posts. 

(188) 



No. 2] THE PERSONNEL IN ADMINISTRATION 141 

I know that it will be urged in favor of the local system now 
obtaining in the United States that this system is congenial to 
our historical traditions and institutions ; that it represents but 
one phase of the predilections of the American people for a 
local as against a national administration of public offices ; that 
the people will never acquiesce in having as their postmaster, 
collector of customs or collector of internal revenue, a person 
brought from another state. Whatever may have been the 
validity of these arguments in the past, when matters of states 
rights and local control loomed larger than at present, I believe 
that all basis for them has passed away. I believe that the 
people are fully prepared to accept real national services, and 
to support a movement that will make our great national 
services offer a real and permanent career to all persons high 
and low therein employed. They are certainly asking the 
question why these services cannot be as efficiently and eco- 
nomically organized and conducted as are private enterprises. 
Whatever the position they may take, the people are certainly 
entitled to know what are the defects of the present system, why 
they exist and what action is required to remove them. If they 
acquiesce in the present system they should at least recognize 
the sacrifice in efficiency involved in its maintenance. 

In the foregoing I have considered in detail only two of the 
many questions connected with the securing of an efficient gov- 
ernment personnel. These two, however, I consider as fun- 
damental. They are both of the same general character. They 
have to do with the one great end that must be obtained if a 
really efficient service is to be secured, that, namely, of making 
the government service a real career to the ambitious, one in 
which not only permanency of tenure during good behavior is 
offered, but in which the positions really worth while can be se- 
cured as the result of conscientious and intelligent work within 
the service. No other device can take the place of the incentive 
to good work that would thus be offered. Until that incentive 
is furnished, until the administration seeks to put the most 
competent man in the most responsible position, other meas- 
ures will be at best but patching up a defective machine. 

(189) 



LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING' 

THOMAS I. PARKINSON 
Legislative Drafting Bureau 

THE need for better drafted legislation has been presented 
frequently and forcibly by prominent lawyers and polit- 
ical scientists. The quantity and quality of our statute 
law, federal and state, has been the subject of vigorous criticism 
for many years. There exists a well-founded belief, which 
found frequent expression at the recent meeting of the Ameri- 
can Bar Association, that the popular discontent arising from 
the tendency of our courts to declare unconstitutional or render 
ineffective by interpretation legislation enacted to remedy ex- 
isting social and industrial evils can be traced directly to the fact 
that much of our so-called social legislation is hastily prepared, 
ill-considered, and thrown on the statute book without careful 
study of constitutional limitations, existing statutes, or the 
phraseology of the principles and rules necessary to give effect 
to the intentions of its proponents. 

The Federal Employers' Liability Act of 1 906, enacted to 
apply only to workmen engaged in interstate commerce, was so 
inaptly worded that the courts held that it included as well em- 
ployes engaged in intrastate commerce, and for this reason was 
unconstitutional.' In 1908 the same act was re-enacted in 
words which precisely limited its effect to workmen engaged in 
interstate commerce, and in this form it has recently been held 
constitutional.^ Senator Sutherland, in a paper before the bar 
association,* expressed the opinion that the decision in the Ives 
case might have been different if the New York Workmen's 
Compensation Law ^ had been more carefully drafted. 

' Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political Science, October 26, 1912. 
'See Employers' Liability Cases, 207 U. S. 463. 
'See Second Employers' Liability Cases, 223 U. S. I. 
* American Bar Association Report, 191 2. 

*Ch. 674 Laws of igio ; declared unconstitutional in Ives v. South Buffalo Rail- 
way Co., 201 N. Y. 271. 

(igo) 



LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING 



H3 



The subject of Prof. Reinsch's paper ' this afternoon empha- 
sizes another need for accurate drafting. If the initiative is to 
be made a successful method of legislating, means must be pro- 
vided for the scientific preparation of initiated measures. Bills 
must be reasonably within the comprehension of the people if 
they are to be enacted or rejected intelligently. Errors and 
" jokers " are less likely to be detected by the whole mass of 
the people than by committees of the legislature, and, if de- 
tected, are more dangerous because the bills cannot be amended 
in the course of discussion and before final action as they could 
be in the legislature. 

My subject is not the need for or the desirability of better 
drafted statutes, but the means by which they may be had. 
The scientific preparation of a statute involves : 

1 . Knowledge of conditions proposed to be regulated, and de- 
termination of the exact evils requiring regulation. 

2. Determination of the nature of the regulation required 
and the precise principles or rules which will effect such reg- 
ulation. 

3. Phraseology of the new principles or rules and of neces- 
sary administrative provisions in apt and precise language which 
will fit them into existing principles of constitutional and statute 
law and make them reasonably clear to the executive and judi- 
cial officers who are to enforce them. 

So-called practical legislators are fond of dividing these prob- 
lems into : ( I ) matters of substance, which are for the legislator, 
not for the drafter, and (2) matters of form, which may be dele- 
gated to the drafter. The distinction, however, is of little value, 
for changes in phraseology frequently result in changes in policy. 
Policies determined upon in conference are often hard to recog- 
nize when they come from the pen of the drafter. No such 
division of the problems of preparing legislation is possible. 
So-called matters of substance and matters of form go hand in 
hand, and if the problems of legislation are to be solved wisely 
and effectively, the legislator and the expert drafter must work 
together. 

'" Initiative and Referendum," by Prof. Paul S. Reinsch, University of Wisconsin. 
See p. 203, infra. 

(191) 



144 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

Prof. John W. Patton, of the University of Pennsylvania Law 
School, says : 

Legislative action, however, should be based upon demonstrated need, 
careful study of the proposed remedy in substance, of its constitution- 
ality, of the meaning of every word used in a proposed act, with a care- 
ful examination of existing decisions as well as statutes. Knowledge 
of law as well as of the English language is required, and the pen of 
one who thinks he has a facility for legislative expression should indeed 
" make haste slowly." ^ 

In workmen's compensation legislation, for example, the leg- 
islator, if he performs his legislative duty seriously, must first 
study existing employers' liability law, and the evils, if any, pro- 
duced by its operation. He must analyze these evils and con- 
sider the possible methods of remedying them, and for this 
purpose he ought to know and appreciate the methods by which 
in other states or countries similar evils have been remedied. 
Having decided that the compensation system offers the best 
means of doing justice, there remain for his decision important 
questions of policy involved in working out the details of such 
a scheme. For example, shall the scheme apply in all employ- 
ments, in all with certain exceptions, or in certain specified em- 
ployments selected because of their extra hazard or otherwise? 
Are all injuries in the course of employment to be compensated, 
or are certain injuries, such as those caused by an employe's own 
deliberate act, to be excepted ? Upon what basis shall the com- 
pensation be computed, and how shall the computation be made, 
and under what conditions shall it be paid? What shall be the 
procedure to determine controverted questions? What, if any, 
administrative organization is required for the proper enforce- 
ment of the scheme? Every one of these problems involves 
the determination of a multitude of detailed questions of policy 
before the precise limits of the rights and liabilities created by 
the act are defined in such manner that employer, employe, ad- 
ministrative officer and the court may know when and to what 
extent the legislature intended that A, an employer, should 

' *^ Festina Lenie," Penna. Law Rev., vol. 59, p. 214. 
(192) 



No. 2] LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING 1 45 

compensate B, his employe, in case the latter is injured in the 
course of his employment. 

The foregoing are frequently described as questions of policy 
with which the drafter should have nothing to do ; they are 
solely for the legislator. Theoretically, this is true. If all 
these questions were carefully weighed and decided by the 
legislator there would be nothing left for the drafter but to put 
the legislative decision into language. Practically, however, 
the great majority of these questions of policy do not occur to 
the legislator until the drafter in the detailed statement of the 
legislative intent uncovers the numerous instances to which the 
legislative intent has not been applied. 

Determination of these questions of policy by no means com- 
pletes the legislative task. There remain questions of consti- 
tutionality and the selection of devices, such as the so-called 
elective scheme, to avoid constitutional restrictions ; the adjust- 
ment of the statutory scheme decided upon to the existing 
statute law on the same or similar subjects; and, finally, the se- 
lection of the language which will carry the statutory scheme 
into a statute at once constitutional and effective for the pur- 
poses for which it was intended. 

Mere phraseology of a statute is itself a difficult task because 
of the imperfections and inadequacies of language, its unskil- 
ful use and the inability of the human mind to foresee all 
the contingencies which will arise in the daily operation of the 
law.' For this reason it is sometimes said that statutes should 
declare principles and not go into detail. 

If important legislation is to be stated effectively in general 
principles it can be done only after very careful consideration 
by the drafters of all questions of detail and the selection 
of such general language as is suited precisely to the develop- 
ment and application of the general principle to the numerous 
particular instances to which it will be applied. Otherwise, the 
act is not truly general ; it is simply incomplete. 

There is an impression in this country that the English 

' Compare remarks of F. Vaughn Hawkins, Esq., rtprintec] in Thayer's Prelimin- 
ary Treatise on Evidence, appendix C, p. 585. 

1 c (193) 



146 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

Workmen's Compensation Act is a good example of a well 
drafted act which states only general principles. In the case of 
Lysons vs. Knowles,' Lord Davey, in rendering his opinion in 
the House of Lords, referred to the act of 1897 as an " extra- 
ordinary ill-drawn act," and said : 

The difficulty really arises from this — that the draftsman has apparently 
not worked out on paper into legislative language the scheme which he 
had in his head, and it looks very much as if the act had really been 
framed from notes of legislative intention and had not been expanded 
into the proper legislative language. Cases which have arisen, and 
cases which are likely to arise, appear not to have been contemplated, 
but apparently were supposed to be covered by the general language 
used in the act. 

The English Compensation Act of 1 897 was expressed in 1 2 ^ 
printed pages; the amended act of 1906 required 24 pages, 
and in addition there are now more than 150 pages of statutory 
rules and regulations' which have the force of law. Compen- 
sation, under the act of 1897, was based on " average weekly 
earnings " 3 without any indication of the method of computing 
such earnings. This computation gave rise to so many diffi- 
culties in the cases which arose under the act that the drafters 
of the amended act of 1906 used nearly 400 additional words to 
explain the method of computing average earnings,* a total of 
400 words in the place of the 3 words in the original act. The 
German Insurance Code of 191 1 represents a like expansion of 
the original laws.* 

The tendency to couch statutes in general terms and to leave 
details of their administration to executive discretion simply 
shifts to executive officers the burden of applying the general 
principle to a particular case. This puts off the difficulty but 

' 84 L. T. R. 65, vol. 3, Workmen's Compensation Cases (Minton-Senhouse), 
p. I (1901). 

'The act and rules are reprinted in the appendix to Ruegg's Employers' Liability 
and IVorkmen's Compensation (1910), pp. 688-868. 

'First Schedule, sec. i, b. 

* First Schedule, section I, clauses ( i) and (2). 

'See translation in Bulletin No. 96 of United States Bureau of Labor. 

U94) 



No. 2] LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING 1 47 

does not overcome it; for if 'Lhe law is to be even reasonably 
clear, executive officers must draft the rules and regulations and 
prescribe the schedules, reports and records, provision for which 
has been omitted from the statute. In this country, however, 
because of the general impression that such rules and regula- 
tions, supplementing general statutes, represent an unconstitu- 
tional delegation of legislative power, it usually happens that the 
general principle is applied in hit-or-miss fashion to each par- 
ticular case as it arises. The New York labor law requires 
" good and sufficient ventilation " in factories.' No specific 
rules have been prescribed and the act is practically unen- 
forceable. 

Moreover, when a general statute is well drawn, the men who 
have worked out its provisions and selected the language in 
which to state them are in a better position to state the specific 
rules for the application of the act to particular instances than 
are administrative and judicial officers before whom it comes as 
a totally new and often unconsidered matter. The drafters of 
a workmen's compensation act, for example, if they have done 
their work well, ought to know whether free house rent re- 
ceived by an employe is to be included in the computation of 
his wages for the purpose of determining his compensation in 
case of injury, and if they fail to state in their act whether it is 
to be included or not, employers, employes, insurance com- 
panies and courts are going to spend a great deal of time in 
attempting to discover whether the legislature intended to 
include or exclude this item, and no one is ever going to know 
what the legislature did intend until some individuals have car- 
ried to the court of last resort a ease involving the question, 
and then the chances are even that the court will guess wrong 
and that the intent of the legislature if it had been expressed 
would have been directly opposite. For example, take the 
Sherman anti-trust law, the meaning of which was in doubt for 
twenty years. There are many people who, if they had been 
placed in the position of the Supreme Court, would probably 
have guessed differently as to the Congressional intent. 

'New York Consolidated 1 aws, ch. 31, sec. 86. 
(195) 



148 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

My point is not that statutes should provide for all conceiv- 
able circumstances. I do not expect to see a perfect statute. 
As was said by Judge Dean: "Laws seem to be born full- 
grown about as often as men are."' But this does not justify 
putting on to the statute books legislation which is obviously in- 
complete. The New Jersey Compensation Act ^ bases compen- 
sation on wages and contains no definition of the term " wages." 
The slightest consideration of the operation of this act would 
disclose to its drafters the absolute certainty that within thirty 
days of its enactment cases would arise involving the question, 
" How are wages to be determined? " 

It seems foolish to omit such provisions merely to avoid what 
are called detailed provisions. Indeed, it is generally true that 
lawyers and other people who attempt to prepare written docu- 
ments on subjects of which they know little prefer the use of 
general language, and it usually happens that the more consid- 
eration and study one gives to the preparation of a written doc- 
ument the less general language is found in it. Explicitness of 
language is in direct proportion to the writer's knowledge of his 
subject matter and its problems. 

Commenting on the detail of some statutes, Frederick W. 
Lehmann, in his President's address before the American Bar 
Association,^ cited a Kansas act requiring for each bed in a 
public inn " clean sheets of sufficient width and length to reach 
the entire width and length of the bed, and with the upper sheet 
to be of sufficient length to fold back over the bedding at the 
upper end or head of the bed," and observed that the drafter 
forgot to require that the sheet be long enough for tucking in at 
the foot. These details may seem petty, but suppose that the 
statute had provided in general terms for sanitary bed cover- 
ings, would the administrative officers have carved out of this an 
enforceable rule which would have effected the purposes of the 
act, and what would the ordinary judge have said with respect 
to the meaning and effect of this act had it come before his 

' In Waters v. Wolf, 162 Pa. 167. 
'Ch. 95, Laws of ign. 
* American Bar Association Report, 1909. 

(196) 



No. 2] LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING 1 49 

court for application? Would he not have quoted the rule that 
statutes in derogation of the common law must be construed 
strictly, and that as the statute said nothing about the length or 
the breadth of sheets it was not to be interpreted as interfering 
with individual liberty more than its language absolutely re- 
quired? 

Definitions are helpful in attaining precision, but they must 
be skilfully used. The New Jersey Compensation Act defines 
" wilful negligence " as " deliberate act or deliberate failure to 
act." ' Literally, this means that a man can escape the charge 
of negligence only by careless action or inaction. 

Blunders in legislative language are varied. They run from 
the ridiculous to the serious. Congress, for example, enacted : 
" That no sponges taken from (specified) waters shall be 
landed, delivered, cured or offered for sale at any port or place 
in the United States of a smaller size than four inches in 
diameter." "" How many of our ports could answer the descrip- 
tion of less than four inches in diameter? The Illinois Com- 
pensation Act for disfigurement of an employe, grants him one- 
fourth of his compensation in case of death. 3 The second 
draft of a compensation act, prepared by the Pennsylvania 
commission, granted compensation to widows of killed work- 
men, and defined widow to include " only those who are liv- 
ing with the decedent at the time of his death." When it 
was pointed out that this suggestion of a plurality of wives 
sounded more like Utah than Pennsylvania, the commission was 
much impressed with the necessity for a change in the wording, 
and after retiring into executive session produced the following, 
which appears in its latest printed draft : The term widow shall 
include " only a widow living with the decedent at the time of 
his death." ^ This may relieve the Pennsylvania workman from 
the insinuation of Mormonism, but if the intent is to give com- 
pensation to the decedent's widow only, why not say : " shall 

» Sec. 3, par. 23. 

*U. S. Statutes at Large, v. 34, p. 313. 

* Act of June 10, 191 1, sec. 5, c. 

* Industrial Accidents Commission of Pennsylvania, 4th draft of compensation act, 

art. II, sec. 6, cj. 10. 

(197) 
1 C • 



I50 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

include only the decedent's wife, living with him at the time of 
his death?" 

Language which reads smoothly does not always represent 
good drafting. As a member of Congress put it, " Like 
Browning's poetry it may be well said and yet not say any- 
thing " to the ordinary reader. 

The framers of important legislation should have the benefit 
of the experience of other states and countries in the same 
field. They should know the legislation of other states and its 
operation. Mere copying of foreign legislation will not suffice. 
Drafters of American compensation acts have repeatedly copied 
from the English act the words "injuries arising out of and in 
the course of employment." Apparently, it is assumed that the 
meaning of these words has been fixed by the English courts 
and is well understood. Prof. Francis H. Bohlen recently 
demonstrated ' that this phrase, instead of having a definite and 
fixed meaning, is one of the most prolific sources of doubt and 
litigation in the English act. Mere copying in the Nevada 
Compensation Act resulted in putting into the very first section 
an important reference to " the preceding section of this act." ' 

Legislation is constantly enacted in ignorance of existing laws. 
For example, on February 14, 1903, Congress passed an act 
transferring the immigration duties of the Secretary of the 
Treasury to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor. 3 On March 
3 of the same year Congress passed an immigration act, in 
many clauses of which duties were imposed on the Secretary of 
the Treasury .< A joint resolution was subsequently necessary to 
correct this blunder.^ 

There appears in a congressional appropriation bill an appro- 
priation for publishing the laws in newspapers, although such 
publication had been expressly prohibited four or five times 
during the same session.^ 

^ Harvard Law Rev., vol. 25 (1912), pp. 328, 401, 517. 

^ Laws 0/ igii, ch. 183, sec. i. 

^ Statutes at Large, vol. 32, p. 825. 

^ Ibid., vol. 32, p. 1213. 

^ Ibid., vol. 33, p. 591. 

* Ibid., vol. 18, p. 349. 

(198) 



No. 2] LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING 151 

In 19 1 2 the New York legislature amended a section of the 
labor law. Later, at the same session, the same section was 
again amended without reference to the previous amendment.' 
The question arises whether the amendment incorporated in the 
first act of 19 1 2, which is not contained in the second amend- 
ment of 191 2, is or is not part of the labor law of the state? 

Another and frequent type of bad drafting is the statement 
of the same idea in different words in the same act. In one section 
of the New Jersey Compensation Act there are no less than four 
different methods of stating the same computation of time.* 

The obvious suggestion for the correction of many of our 
political ills, including unscientific statutes, is the election of 
better men to the legislature. A good legislator, however, 
is not necessarily a good drafter; and a legislator who is a good 
drafter is so busy with legislative policies on a host of subjects 
that he has little time to devote to jthe wording of laws. Mark 
Twain said that a man who attempts to study German has not 
much time for anything else. Drafting statutes is much like 
learning German. 

John Stuart Mill declared : " There is hardly any kind of in- 
tellectual work which so much needs to be done, not only by 
experienced and exercised minds, but by minds trained to the 
task through long and laborious study, as the business of making 
laws." 3 Our legislators are elected to voice for brief periods 
the political sentiment of their communities and their attention 
is largely confined to this field of activity. Having in mind the 
statement of Mill, it is apparent that the selection of legislators 
by the elective method does not insure the selection of men of 
"experienced" minds for making written law; that the fre- 
quency of election fails to assure any opportunity for a pro- 
longed experience in lawmaking; and that the nature of the 
political work which legislators must perform to gain and keep 
their seats precludes them from and unfits them for " long 
and laborious study." 

■ Laws of igi2, ch. 337 and ch. 543. 
^ Laws 0/ igii, ch. 95, sec. II, par. 15. 

* Representative Government, People's Edition, 1876, p. 39. 

(199) 



152 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol.111 

Great Britain has solved the drafting problem partially by 
creating the office of parliamentary counsel, by whom all 
government bills are drafted. Practical legislators and lawyers 
in this country have an indefinite notion that the creation of an 
expert official drafting agency would in some way interfere 
with the ordinary functions of the legislator. The real function 
of the legislator is to make known the social need for a given 
rule of law at a given time. It does not necessarily include the 
phrasing of that rule. Originally, the English Parliament peti- 
tioned the king for the enactment of laws ; the king and his 
counsellors, if the petition were granted, determined the phrase- 
ology of the law. Representative legislators elected by popular 
vote may voice the wishes of their constituents with respect to 
the general policy which shall govern the community on any 
particular subject; but, ordinarily, they are not sufficiently 
skilled in the handling of the English language as an instrument 
of law-making, and in the knowledge of existing constitutional 
and statute law, to determine the precise phraseology of the 
rules which shall make effective the policies so determined 
upon. 

The consequence of using unprecise language in a statute is a 
loss of that effective control over the policies of legislation 
which the legislature is empowered constitutionally to exercise 
to the entire exclusion of both the executive and judicial 
branches of the government. Moreover, a vast amount of time 
and painstaking care is expended by administrative officers, 
lawyers, and courts in the determination of the exact meaning 
of a statute or of its words or phrases. In all but one or two of 
the cases which have been litigated under the California Com- 
pensation Act during the first year of its operation " the issue 
was upon the construction of the act and not the fact of disability 
or the extent of the injury.' 

The conclusion seems inevitable that every legislative body 
ought to be supplied with a force of carefully-trained lawyers 
whose duty it shall be to give attention to these problems before 
a statute is cast in its final form. 

'Article by A. J. Pillsbury, member of Industrial Accident Board of California, in 
The California Outlook, Saturday, Oct. 5, 1912. 

(200) 



No. 2] LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING 1 5 5 

Definite proposals are now being made to furnish legislatures 
with expert drafting assistance. Several states, notably Wis- 
consin and Pennsylvania, have drafting and legislative refer- 
ence bureaus at the state capitol. At the last session Congress 
gave serious attention to a bill creating a similar agency at 
Washington.' The Am.erican Bar Association has just created 
a special committee on the drafting of legislation to study 
existing agencies for the rendering of technical assistance to 
legislators in the preparation of their laws, and to report its 
recommendations to the annual meeting in 191 3.' 

Legislative reference libraries are doing excellent work so 
far as they go, but the drafting end of their work has not been 
so well developed as the collection and indexing of printed ma- 
terials. This may be due to the fact that the lawyers are 
slower than the political scientists in catching up with modern 
tendencies. 

Another device of which frequent use is now being made is 
to take the preparation of important legislation out of the 
hands of the regular legislator and entrust it to a legislative com- 
mission. This plan may or may not be effective for good. 
The commission, like many other governmental agencies, de- 
pends for its usefulness on the men who constitute it, the time 
they devote to their work and the men to whom they entrust 
the actual preparation of their bills. If a skilled workman were 
to do his work as carelessly and with as many blotches appear- 
ing over the whole face of it as appear in some of the compen- 
sation acts drafted by commissions, his employer would not 
hesitate to discharge him without pay or send him back to do 
his job over again. 

The wise solution of this problem of drafting American stat- 
utes will do much to relieve administrative officers and courts of 

' Concessional Reference Bureau : Hearings before the Committee on the 
Library, House of Representatives, Feb. 26th and 27th, 1912. (Published in 
pamphlet form by Government Printing Office.) 

'The members of this committee are: WiHiam Draper Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa., 
Chairman; Samuel Untermyer, New York, N. Y. ; Louis D. Brandeis, Boston, 
Mass.; Frederick W. Lehmann, St. Louis, Mo.; Henry C. Hall, Colorado Springs, 
Colo. J Thomas L Parkinson, New York, N. Y. ; Ernst Freund, Chicago, Hi. 

(201) 



154 



EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 



vain efforts to discover legislative intent where there is none, or 
where it is confused in a mass of ill-chosen words, and will re- 
move one important cause of the discontent which has been 
made the basis for the proposal of popular recall of judicial de- 
cisions affecting the constitutionality of state legislation or the 
recall of judges rendering such decisions. 

I have no panacea for the ills of legislation. I have no scheme 
to suggest for the production of well-drafted statutes. I know 
of no device or organization which can be depended upon to 
provide us with good drafting. Official drafting and legislative 
reference bureaus are not of themselves sufficient; machinery 
will not run without power. In the last analysis the problem is 
to secure men of training and experience who will devote their 
professional careers to the scientific formulation and develop- 
ment of our written laws. In the words of E. W. Smith, Esq.. 
president of the Pennsylvania Bar Association, the drafting of a 
statute is not a " pastime for a summer afternoon." ' In many 
ways preparation of statutes, because of the increasing quantity 
and broad effect of our statute law, is even more important than 
the judicial function which operates only on controversies as 
they arise between man and man. Again, Mr. Smith says: 
" Legislation is necessarily fragmentary, unless it is prepared by 
skilful lawyers, familiar with the subject, who are ready to de- 
vote much time and thought to its preparation. But it is foolish 
to assume that all lawyers can draft statutes. Such work re- 
quires a concentration of mind and of expression that few men 
have." Until we are impressed with the necessity of having our 
statute law drafted by such men, and until we find the men, we 
shall continue to find in our session laws numerous examples of 
legislative blunders, some of them amusing, some pathetic, and 
unfortunately many of them serious. 

' Pennsylvania Bar Association Report, 191 1. 
(202) 



THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM ' 

PAUL S. REINSCH 
Professor of Political Science, University of Wisconsin 

IT is very fashionable on the part of those who consider 
themselves conservative and given to test the safeness of 
things, to look upon the initiative and referendum in this 
country as a political fad, a part of a political disease of our 
people. They think this a phase we shall have passed through 
in a comparatively short time to return to saner methods. Yet 
it seems to me that those who console themselves about the 
progress of this institution in such a manner are taking a most 
superficial view. If I read our present situation as a nation 
aright, I believe we must see in it the awakening of a much 
deeper political consciousness than we have hitherto had. 
Heretofore our life has been occupied with economic interests, 
and the political factor, strident as it was at times, was never- 
theless superficial — the old marching campaign was its emblem. 
We did have times of important political action, but in general 
we were more concerned with economic life. I consider the 
movement for the initiative and referendum as a part of that 
great political awakening which the nation is now experiencing 
and which will bring about a permanent change in our political 
methods. 

The old party caucus with all its trickery and all its sham 
has been so utterly discredited that we shall never he able to go 
back to it. We have seen with new eyes the old-time platforms, 
and they will no longer satisfy us. The cry of democracy is 
" More democracy." It holds that as the constitutions of the 
past have not worked well we must have them more demo- 
cratic. We are outdoing Rousseau. He pronounced for demo- 
cratic action even in a large state, but could not work out the 

' Read at the meeting of the Academy of Political -Science, October 26, 
1912. 

(203) 



ic6 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

necessary mechanism, and therefore stopped short of national 
democracy ; he never got beyond federalism in his constructive 
ideas. Accordingly the modern initiative and referendum 
completes the Rousseauic theory, in that it considers the 
nation a unit, makes use of the modern advances in com- 
munication and views the electorate as one body capable of 
acting together. 

We shall have to go through this second phase of Rousseau- 
ism. The convention phase was put to the proof during the 
French revolution when the older Rousseauism was thoroughly 
tested. Now it will be tested in all its completeness by making 
the people the primary factor in political action. This brings 
up the question of certain elements of human nature, according 
to which political institutions are viewed not as instruments, not 
as elaborating energy that already exists, but as virtually creat- 
ing new energy, as if new virtues could manifest themselves 
through them. That is expecting too much of any institution. 
There exists in a people the political energy, virtue, conscious- 
ness, which seeks for a vent, which wants to manifest itself 
in action; and if there are impediments, institutions that dam 
up such energies, there will be an outbreak of some kind. 

To a certain extent the energy of public opinion was hampered 
by our institutions of the past, and yet it would be too much to 
say that by creating new institutions we shall give to the body 
politic a different energy. There lies the chief argument against 
the initiative and referendum. It seems to demand too much, 
to consider the people as a body able to initiate, having the con- 
stant energy to watch the affairs of the state and judge their de- 
tails, as well as to make themselves masters of the legislative 
situation. That is where the fault lies in my opinion — in the 
extreme, the radical policy of the initiative and referendum. 
There are many functions in the state. There is the function 
of deliberation, of judging, of taking administrative action, and 
to think that the function of voting in itself can take the place 
of any or all of these others and make them unnecessary, is 
expecting too much. Voting has often been used for the pur- 
pose of assisting legislation ; it was used even in the Romans' 
day, but then there was always a clear alternative, yes or no — 

(204) 



No. 2] THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM 157 

a point that ought to be worked out and thoroughly. But we 
desire to go beyond that; we desire to have the consciousness of 
the people enter more intimately into the work of legislation, 
and yet we are expecting too much of this reform when on the 
one hand we believe that a popular vote can take legislative 
action in its fullness and completeness and thus virtually super- 
sede the legislature, and on the other hand expect from it the 
political regeneration, the creation of new political forces, 
energies and virtues. 

With these reservations, however, I consider the initiative and 
referendum as an institution that carries within it a great 
promise for our commonwealths, one that ought to be utilized 
and taken advantage of, and that cannot be brushed aside. 

Throughout the world parliamentary bodies, have been a 
disappointment in not coming up to the ideal of liberalism, in 
not being the " councils of the wise," in which after due delib- 
eration the best interests of the body politic are expressed in 
the form of law. That is not the nature of any legislative body, 
not even of that most excellent one, the British Parliament. 
Too much was expected of this institution, as of every institu- 
tion when first introduced to the world. Now the tendency is 
in the opposite direction. In England even it is the elector that 
has direct relation with the controlling interest, and Parliament 
seems hardly more than a registering agency to record the will 
of the electorate and keep the ministry in power. The old 
dramatic struggle for influence in the House of Commons that 
lent life and interest to the political action of England during 
the greater part of the nineteenth century has almost passed 
away and it is now carried on before the electorate. But 
Parliament has not lost its importance, because it is the place 
where energies converge, where opinions are formed, the place 
for the promoting of policies, and it remains by far the most 
powerful and interesting body of legislation in the world. How 
different with our state legislatures ! They have become so dis- 
credited that they offer no field for political action of a high 
type, and so they naturally became the instruments of the 
" great interests" whose leaders alone have been far-sighted 
enough to see how important the political power therein con- 

(205) 



158 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

centrated really is. Now it is in this connection — in making the 
body of the electorate conscious of the vital importance of state 
legislation — that I believe the greatest value of the initiative 
and referendum lies. 

My expectation is that its effect will be as follows: This 
institution will assist the people, the body of the electorate, in 
the development of its political consciousness; the conscious- 
ness of power which it brings will assist in that direction. 
Second, it will make the body of the electorate more familiar 
with legislative problems and more interested. In Athenian 
democracy, every citizen was supposed to take part in all the 
functions of government, to judge, administer, elect. That 
is no longer possible, but nothing will so train the electorate to 
see the difficulties and problems of legislation, and to form an 
intelligent judgment about them, as having to solve those prob- 
lems itself at times. Moreover, it will increase the interest of 
the people in the legislatures, as being organs which are con- 
stantly engaged with dealing with these important matters ; and 
finally it will serve to increase the sense of responsibility of 
these bodies. We cannot of course hope to get that direct 
sense of responsibility which is the key to the English system, 
where the possibility of a dissolution and an appeal to the 
nation weighs constantly on Parliament and every member 
thereof; but the referendum, too, is an appeal to the electorate, 
and the adoption of the proposal rejected by the legislature 
in a measure parallels the return to power of a British "Op- 
position." At present there is no adequate way in which the 
electorate can express its concurrence, or its disapproval, or its 
indignation at what has been done. General elections are not 
fitted for this; at the most they may take out an important 

ssue, make it a matter of general interest, and submit it to the 
people. 

I have not time to go into discussion of the details of legis- 
lation thus far attempted, but if you will bear with me I 
will point out one or two essential matters. The legislation of 
Oregon to my mind is attempting too much. It expects of the 

electorate a constant exercise of legislative action and if this 
expectation should be met it would mean a removal of the 

(206) 



No. 2] THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM \ 59 

center of deliberation from the halls of legislation to the popu- 
lar forum. Now the Oregonians who are the most ardent 
supporters of this system always protest that they did in no 
sense intend to discredit the legislature. Mr. U'Ren said it 
would be far more creditable to go to the legislature after this 
reform has been completely established than ten years ago, 
because it would no longer be prima facie evidence of corrup- 
tion and low political motives to be a member of that body. 
But the actual tendency is different. If there is to be a con- 
stant exercise of the legislative function by the general elector- 
ate it cannot be expected that the legislature itself will con- 
tinue important enough to deserve the attention and coopera- 
tion of really able men. In the suggestion that all that is really 
necessary is a council to work out administrative measures to 
be submitted to the electorate, we have an explicit admission 
of the tendency to eliminate that body which our own experi- 
ence and that of other countries has shown to be of value. 
Between the growing administration and the electorate, there 
would be no intermediary, no body of men somewhat above the 
ordinary political intelligence, somewhat more experienced, to 
judge of measures which the administration suggests, to in- 
terpret them in a way to the electorate ; and at the same time to 
give the administration assistance in getting close to public 
opinion and the needs of the state ; the inevitable result would 
be a close bureaucracy. California has tried to encourage the 
legislature by giving it the Swiss alternative, so that it may 
either send a measure directly from the initiative to the electors 
or submit at the same time an alternative measure of its own. 
This is apt to cause a good deal of confusion: as has been 
cynically remarked by the Evening Post, the electors would 
usually vote for both measures, and then that measure which 
carried the majority would be declared law ! 

Another defect appears when laws passed by popular vote 
cannot be repealed except by a like vote. We have already 
constitutional law and legislative law and we then should have 
popular law in addition. Logically any action of the legisla- 
ture which superseded a part of the popular law must be con- 
sidered void by the courts. The complexity which is intro- 

(207) 



l60 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

duced into our system through the fact of a judicial review 
would be emphasized by the California arrangement where you 
have three categories, legislative law, popular law and constitu- 
tional law, one standing above the other, one prevailing over tha 
other. This is unnecessary. The Oregon courts have refused 
to give the popular law a higher rank than the legislative ; the 
proposed provision in Washington is that popular law may be 
repealed after two years, but not before, by legislative action. 
It seems to me it is best to place all law on an equal footing, 
allowing to the popular law its prestige as having been passed on 
by the electorate, but giving it no artificial validity, which only 
introduces confusion and complexity into our system. While 
speaking of the California system it ought to be said that the 
Californians believe that the complexity of their system will be 
reduced, because hitherto they have amended their constitution 
so frequently (sometimes fifteen or sixteen amendments pend- 
ing at the same time) that it became a vast code of legislative 
matter. After the introduction of the initiative and referendum, 
changes that are popular may be made without being put into the 
constitution, and there will not be so much judicial interference 
with legislation. That is their hope, and yet their provision 
with respect to giving a special degree of validity to the 
popular will seems to run counter to it. 

The proposed law of Wisconsin is based on the idea that the 
initiative and referendum is to be an agency for assisting the 
legislature, but in no way making it superfluous. Accordingly 
any measure that is introduced into the legislature, whether 
passed or rejected, but only such measures, may be referred to 
the electorate. Thus every bill that goes before the people must 
have had the benefit of being discussed there and acted upon, 
whether favorably or unfavorably. In this way it is intended to 
protect the importance of the legislature, and even to increase 
it by centering there the public interest. If in this connection 
we consider the growth in importance of state governments, we 
see how an opportunity is given for a governor, if he is a con- 
structive statesman, to have his measures introduced in the legis- 
lature, to have it known that they go with the endorsement of 
his political judgment, and if they are defeated in that body to 
have them called out and referred to the public. 

(208) 



No. 2] THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM i6l 

It is not believed that the people will be constantly legislat- 
ing. That is where most of the opponents of the system argue 
wrongly, one might almost say deceitfully. The recall is a 
power to be used only very rarely, and the referendum is, per- 
haps, best understood as giving tne electorate the right and 
power to make itself felt at any time without revolutionary 
action. We are living at the present time in a period of almost 
revolutionary energy, but that will pass away. These energies 
are not permanent; it is necessary to count upon the steady 
interest of the public in politics, but of that we cannot expect 
too much. Our constitutional machinery ought to be so ad- 
justed that the force of public opinion would be sufficient 
to start, stop or control it. There ought to be means by which 
the public can obtain a specific law which it demands and 
which is blocked by our state legislatures. 

The initiative and referendum will introduce clearness and 
logical sequence into our political action, and center the public 
interest on legislative problems, but will not mean that every 
matter of legislation will be laid before the electorate to the 
wearying of political energies. The Wisconsin legislation is 
an experiment, but one which bases itself upon the premise 
that the legislatures are performing a function that cannot 
be fulfilled by mere voting, and that this function must be 
strengthened, elevated and purified but not extinguished or 
passed over to a body which cannot deliberate as a legislative 
body can. It is thus that I consider the initiative and refer- 
endum to be a reform in true harmony with the great move- 
ment which is passing over our nation at the present time. 
There will be a liberation of political energies when it is possible 
for the energies at any time to make themselves decisive. The 
initiative and referendum will have a clarifying and quieting 
effect, because as everybody knows, the people are essentially 
conservative. If they have the knowledge that it is in their 
power to ask and obtain, it will be a safety valve in the most 
dangerous periods through which our republic may have to 
pass. And in all times it will be an education for the people, 
just as it is in the English democracy, to feel that at any time 
they may have to vote, and that any important measure may 
be brought to them for their pronouncement. 
1 1 (209) 



THE DIRECT PRIMARY VERSUS 
THE CONVENTION' 

ALBERT BUSHNELL HART 
Professor of Government, Harvard University 

IT is with some hesitation that I appear this evening to speak 
upon a subject so vast and so imperfectly understood. The 
word " primary " has not until recently been used as we are 
using it now. We have had primary colors and primary affec- 
tions and prime mess beef; it is an anomaly that such a new 
use of the term should have been created, and a demand caused 
for a new dictionary. 

I feel sensibly the danger of using new words, even the 
most ordinary, lest they might be misunderstood in their politi- 
cal connection. These are the days, at least this is the week, 
when nobody can use the word "liar" without somebody 
indignantly answering: " He is nothing of the kind; why does 
the ex-President attack the senator from Pennsylvania?" You 
can't say " primary " without somebody shouting : " He's not a 
primary force, there are a great many others." I must say 
that the attention which is paid by the American public to one 
of its public men makes me think of the Sunday school into 
which the brisk minister came and said, " Now, children, as I 
came along I saw a wonderful creature. This creature was 
sitting in a tree. It was sitting on a bough. It was a creature 
with a bushy tail, and it was holding a nut in its claws. Now 
can any of you tell me what that wonderful creature was? " 
And there was only one child who could answer and he said : 
" It was God." Well, there is more than one man in this 
country, more than one candidate, certainly there is as much 
as a candidate and a half and possibly there are two. 

We are not speaking to-night of candidates or politics, but of 
primaries, and in the discussion between Senator Brackett and 

'Address at the dinner of the Academy of Political Science, October 25, 191 2. 

(210) 



DIRECT PRIMARY VERSUS CONVENTION 163 

myself, I understand that we are to follow the plan of Irish 
"repartay" "where you say to-day what you are going to 
think of to-morrow." So the address of Senator Brackett will 
overset what is now being said. But Senator Brackett and you 
and I and all other sensible people will agree that we are sim- 
ply discussing a practical question, that what we desire is 
to secure the expression of the will of the people in their nomi- 
nations, and then to secure the choice of those who will carry 
out the will of the people. To that end we desire to nominate 
persons who really represent the party, and to destroy all that 
tends to interfere with a genuine expression of popular will. 

For this discussion I have singular personal qualifications, 
having been elected by a state-wide primary in a state where I 
could not have been elected in any other way, then having 
served in the greatest nominating convention ever held, — the 
greatest and perhaps the last — and being now a candidate for 
office by designation of a political committee of a party which 
has no political existence recognized by the laws of Massachu- 
setts. Thus you will observe that I have cultivated imparti- 
ality; whatever may be the decision of this distinguished jury, 
I shall be acquitted. 

We have before us the two rival systems of the convention 
and the primary, and I will try to take the wind out of the sails 
of the gentleman who is to follow by discussing the advantages 
of conventions. The first one is that the United States has 
somehow got on with the political convention, and a large 
number of distinguished men, lovers of their kind and excellent 
public servants, have reached the public service by that road. 
Then, the convention is a means, though perhaps not the only 
means, of a common acquaintance and understanding, which is 
of great significance and value. In the next place, conventions 
have frequently reflected the wishes of the voters, and the con- 
vention is in harmony with the representative system ; nobody 
can deny that. Additional advantages are that conventions 
balance the ticket geographically, a result impossible to attain 
otherwise; that conventions allow for second choices; that the 
convention has the making of the platform by tradition, and 
thus the committing of the party to a variety of reforms and 

(211) 



1 64 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

principles — upon which it usually proceeds to turn its back. 
Further, there is nothing that is so much fun as a political con- 
vention. It is more sport than a baby, noisier than a football 
game, more complex than a woman's club ; it cheers the voter, 
benefits the newspaper proprietor, and leaves squashy footsteps 
on the sands of time. 

Nevertheless I ask you gentlemen before me, from personal 
experience, if you do not agree with me that there are serious 
disadvantages in political conventions, which have tended to 
bring them into disrepute. That disadvantage which appears 
most prominent is the disorder and turmoil of conventions. 
This is not inherent, but is due largely to the practise of national 
and state conventions of holding meetings in enormous halls in 
the presence of hundreds or thousands of spectators, frequently 
put there to influence the work of the convention. On the floor 
there is confusion, noise, cheering, uproariousness. Conven- 
tions have of late grown much noisier, probably from the habit 
on the part of some of the members of attending college ath- 
letic sports; and the convention is not a place in which to learn 
good manners or sobriety of speech. 

It ought to be said, however, that the disorder of conventions 
is not the novelty which some people suppose it. In the Re- 
publican convention in i860 there was just such a hullabaloo as 
in 191 2. A " howler" was employed to aid the cause of Abe 
Lincoln. In 1856, when Fremont was nominated, there was a 
great uproar; the picture of the candidate was shown and a 
salute of guns fired. There is always a possibility of stampeding 
a convention, for the thing has been done many times ; but the 
shrewd political leader takes his precautions against that danger. 
I must say from a brief but intense experience in a political 
convention that I believe that noise and uproar and pictures 
make about as much difference to a convention as the rooting 
of the fans makes with a first-class pitcher. Few conventions 
can be stampeded by the audience. 

Another indictment is the fraud in which conventions are so 
frequently engaged. That is not a subject of which respectable 
people like the members of this academy have knowledge, but 
when you get inside politics you discover how county and state 

(212) 



No. 2] DIRECT PRIMARY VERSUS CONVENTION 165 

and national conventions are manipulated and furthermore how 
they are linked together under the elaborate representative 
system. That system is the growth of natural conditions. The 
county convention usually elects to the state, and the state to the 
national convention ; so if there is any taint of fraud or violence 
it goes all the way up ; the state convention is carried in scores 
of cases by fraudulent county conventions, and the national 
convention may be affected in the same way. 

The reason why such fraud and violence are possible is 
largely that political leaders have looked on politics as a game 
with certain rules which you are at liberty to ignore if the 
umpire is not looking; and when a delegation is stolen the 
other side acquiesces, thinking it will do the same thing next 
time. Anyone examining the contests at Chicago from the 
southern states must be struck by the fact that almost every 
one of the delegations down there is tainted with irregularity 
of some kind. 

I say irregularity. We must never forget that regularity is a 
political term with a special definition. In politics the regular 
is simply the man or committee or convention which is re- 
cognized by the next highest authority as being the proper 
thing. That county convention is regular which is manipulated 
by people in accord with the state committee ; that state con- 
vention is regular which is so recognized by the national com- 
mittee of the party. There is no such thing as absolute regu- 
larity, because in the development of American parties they 
have been treated as private clubs, and until very recently there 
has been no legal ascertainment of what is regular or irregular. 

I do not mean to say that a considerable portion of all the 
conventions is stolen or manipulated, that the wrong people are 
admitted and the right kept out; but within about ten years in 
Massachusetts we have had two disgraceful state conventions. 
In one a faction got possession of the admission tickets and 
gave them to their friends, took possession and nominated the 
candidate. The state courts dealt with that and disallowed it. 
Another convention was stampeded by one of the factions stay- 
ing in the hall all night; when morning dawned they had posses- 
sion, gave out the tickets, refused to be dispossessed, and con- 

(213) 
1 ^ • 



1 66 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

trolled that hall ; the main part of the party trooped out to 
another place and two conventions were held at the same mo- 
ment. I will not say which was the proper one, but they 
could not both have been the regular expression of the party. 

In national conventions there has been much less difficulty; 
for the national convention is under the limelight; membership 
is highly prized, partly as a badge of party honor, partly 
because of the pleasure of being present, partly because of the 
glittering badges with which you paralyze your neighbors when 
you get home. In any case membership is eagerly desired. 
There have been very few accusations of foul play in national 
conventions in comparison with the state conventions. That 
was why the country was so aroused by the difficulty at Chicago 
in 191 2. As a participant it struck me that the real issue was 
not the fortunes of this or that candidate, but a rivalry between 
members of two sections of the party, each asserting that it had 
gone through a proper process for ascertaining and expressing 
the opinion of the voters from whom it came. 

Another reason why conventions have been losing ground is 
that they have been attacked by " conventionitis." You know 
how you may have within your person a latent need for an 
operation for appendicitis ; you go on for years, and one day 
you wake in the morning very uncomfortable, and off you go 
to a hospital and there is an operation. That is about what 
has happened to the convention. Conventionitis has been 
latent all the time ; but all of a sudden there was a terrible at- 
tack and the whole country became aware of it. The patient 
groaned fearfully; experts were called in and the operation has 
been performed — but we do not know what the state of the 
patient is now. There was a man in Indiana last winter who 
was taken to the hospital with typhoid fever ; next day paraly- 
sis set in ; the day after, he was operated on for appendicitis, 
and they said he was doing well. Some political parties seem 
to be going through such an experience. 

The next great difficulty is the bosses. If there is any boss 
present I beg to say there is nothing personal intended. Out 
in Colorado they had as speaker in the legislature a rather im- 
patient man. One day a member rose solemnly to declare 

(214) 



No. 2] DIRECT PRIMARY VERSUS CONVENTION 167 

that the record of the previous day was incorrect and moved 
that it be corrected, and the speaker answered him sternly: 
" Young man, don't you cast no aspirations on the help in this 
house." I won't cast no aspirations on gentlemen who are 
carrying on the politics of the country. Bossism, so far as it 
means control of parties, is a perfectly reputable pursuit, and 
there is no reason why a man should not make it a life-work 
provided he plays the game above board and has a majority be- 
hind him. The real difficulty comes with the proprietary bosses, 
men who are working in the dark to create something which 
shall be opposed to the real desire of the people whom they 
represent. The boss convention is intolerable because of a 
sinful secrecy of action ; the boss .knows what is going to hap- 
pen ; the voter does not, and still less does the member of the 
convention. The efficient boss develops a military system in 
which a hundred to twelve hundred delegates elected in the 
ordinary way by party constituencies or conventions are con- 
fronted with the mystery of the convention. It seems incred- 
ible that such a body of intelligent men should submit to do as 
one man tells them to do ; when that happens it is not a con- 
vention, it is a phonograph. 

Another difficulty with the convention is the feudal side of 
it. The truth is we are always illustrating what the eugenic 
people call the reversion to an original type, always going back 
to the middle ages in our politics. We have substantially a 
series of feudal systems, in which you, the voter, put your 
hands between the hands of the district captain ; the captain 
pledges allegiance to the county chairman ; the county chair- 
man accepts the suzerainty of the 'state boss. There is a lord- 
ship and an over-lordship all the way up ; you perform military 
service — that is, you vote — and your over-lord protects you. 
There was in Europe a century ago, a breaking-up process called 
immediatization, by which a man jumped over the lord and went 
straight to the king, and the primary is a system by which the 
candidate may come into direct communication with the men 
who are to elect him. 

The convention system has broken down ; it is sick and about 
to go to the hospital because of the lack of a tribunal for settling 

(215) 



1 68 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

in a fair manner the cases of contest. They have been settled 
sometimes by the chairman, by the executive committee, or by 
the standing political committee, but frequently without any 
reference to the real merits of the case, the ground of decision 
being, not how the members are chosen but whether they will 
vote for A or for B ; that is, the conventions are not really 
representative. They give rise to the question whether the 
whole constituency shall nominate or a self-selected part of the 
constituency. 

Of course everyone is aware that there is such a thing as an 
unbossed convention; New York gave us a sample in 191 2. 
Yet people look with wonder at the idea that there should be an 
unbossed convention. To arrive at that result you must get rid 
of a large part of your customary political machinery. The 
children at school were one day asked to make a sentence 
in which should be used the rather unfamiliar word " disar- 
range." One little Italian girl managed it. She said : " Li 
padre dissa morning fin de range notta burn ; he say, ' Damma 
dissa range.' " I put no words in the mouths of persons re- 
sponsible for conventions when they find a disarrangement of 
their system. 

The convention system is visibly in a state of collapse, as was 
revealed through the contests at Chicago. These contests in 
part turned not on the question whether delegates had proper 
credentials, but on the right of a state to regulate the election of 
delegates to a national convention. In the course of that dis- 
cussion it was discovered that a considerable number of dele- 
gates sat there through the workings of state primary statutes. 
I was one of those persons, and hotly resented it when Sereno 
E. Payne declared on the floor that any state law that was con- 
trary to a rule made by the Republican national committee was 
no law. That raised the question of which was servant and 
which master, convention or voter. 

If conventions do not work well, what of the rival system of 
primaries? Let me enumerate and admit the very serious dis- 
advantages of the primary system. It means frequency of 
elections and a chronic difficulty as to second choices. It un- 
doubtedly facilitates the nomination of weak men, raises a 

(216) 



No. 2] DIRECT PRIMARY VERSUS CONVENTION 169 

difficulty about the platform, which usually has to be made in 
some new fashion, and it has introduced a new element of 
expense and difficulty and hard work that was never heard of 
before. The legitimate expenses of a candidate under the 
system of primaries are considerably greater than in the old 
system. Governor Deneen spent $200,000 this year in the 
primary election. To make a man known to all the voters 
by a postal card costs $12,000 in Illinois. Such expenses are 
legitimate, but out of proportion to the means of ordinary men; 
and it is clear that if the system is to be worked in that way it 
must break down. 

At last we reach the advantages of primaries. Shall I say 
they are so clear to an intelligent audience that they do not 
need enumeration? First of all, the system enlarges the field 
of public service by increasing the range of men who can have 
some hope of getting into office ; it even allows some cranks 
to get in. We need men who have the complete belief that 
the particular reform on which they are engaged is necessary 
to society; and such men we call cranks. It would do every 
legislature good to have one or two cranks. Of course they 
must not be so cranky as to differ seriously with us ! The 
socialist, for instance, is simply a man who thinks on social 
questions differently from the men in your club ; and the cranks 
are simply those who are more cranky than their neighbors. 

A further advantage of this system is that you get unbossed 
men. You may recall the method by which the Yale sopho- 
more achieved " Skull and Bones." He broke into their 
house and found out all their secrets, whereupon they had to 
elect him. Many men have got into the organization by show- 
ing that the election could not be carried without them. But 
under the system of primaries it is possible for men to aspire 
to office and to reach it without being dependent on the good 
will or adoption of a particular individual. Not only are many 
more men candidates, but many others have hopes; and the 
hopelessly hopeful can by the primary be brought to realize 
that they cannot be nominated. To be sure, the primary 
system involves numerous elections ; but when people feel 
there is a great issue and a great man before them, they find 

(217) 



I70 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

no difficulty in getting out to vote. That means that there 
is a wider chance of accompHshing ends through the primary. 
Futhermore, a primary on delegates to a convention involves 
the discussion of a candidate's work and qualifications before 
the convention meets, if the convention is retained. 

I think there is nothing more hopeful than the kind of cam- 
paign we have had lately, the persistent effort to persuade the 
voter by literature, public meetings and an appeal to personal 
loyalty. In my experience no campaign, certainly none since 
i860, has made the people of the United States so intent on 
these problems. It is an educative process. 

The primary system simplifies the electoral machinery. It 
strikes at the places where the difficulties are greatest. It 
eliminates a great number of small conventions, and greatly 
diminishes campaign contributions and expenditures of an un- 
licensed kind. Election expenses have seemed to increase, but 
it is publicity of accounts that makes it seem so. The investiga- 
tion at Washington shows how much smaller are the outlays this 
year than in any campaign for twenty years. The primary sys- 
tem almost prevents carrying contests to a convention. If more 
states had adopted the primary system, there would have been 
no row at Chicago, for if the delegates had all brought certifi- 
cates of election from their state officials, there could not have 
been any difficulty in their taking their seats. The method 
shuts out dark horses. It does not always exclude men of in- 
firm character, but it is almost impossible to nominate an 
unknown man. I have heard of a man in Nebraska with no 
friends or following, who got himself at the same election on 
the Republican, Democratic and Socialist tickets and got 2,000 
votes. Still 2,000 is far from a majority in Nebraska. 

Finally, the great merit of the system is that it weakens the 
boss's power. The boss is a condition, not a theory; he exists 
because the complexity of modern politics makes him almost 
essential. The boss is also the man who has reconciled the 
executive with the legislative power. Nevertheless the boss is 
not omnipotent; if you can alter the circumstances by which he 
gets illicit power against the public, you can to a great extent 
destroy that power. The primary furnishes the best way of 

(218) 



No. 2] DIRECT PRIMARY VERSUS CONVENTION 171 

finding out whether the boss is a boss. Nobody outside of 
New York, of course, knows who is the best candidate for the 
governorship of the state ; but one thing is certain, neither of 
the old-party candidates now in the field in this state would 
have been nominated but for the desire to " pander to the 
better elements of society." 

The primary makes it possible for men to enter absolutely 
against the boss. Governor Johnson in 191 1 defied the polit- 
ical and railroad machine; but he could not have done it ex- 
cept for primary laws. Is not the the main reason for opposing 
the primary system the fact of its being unfavorable to bossism? 
Otherwise why is it so difficult to find the bosses who want it? 
Do you think that such shrewd men would have allowed a 
device like the primary to pass by them if they could have 
controlled it? Do you know a boss who works for this system 
on the ground that it makes him safer in his power? We must 
not suppose that the primary system will do everything. 
There will be selfish men and thieves and demagogues still. A 
maker of patent medicine years ago made a fortune by adver- 
tising that his medicine would not cure " thunder humor," and 
the apparent honesty of this exclusion attracted everyone's 
attention. Sick people commented on it, and confident that 
they had not got " thunder humor," felt safe in buying a bottle 
to cure what they had got. So I will say that the primary will 
not cure everything ; perhaps it will not cure boss-humor, but 
it will infallibly cure some of our political evils and will build 
up a more nearly democratic community. 

(219) 



THE ADVANTAGES OF THE CONVENTION^ 



w 



EDGAR T. BRACKETT 
Senator from the Thirtieth Senatorial District, New York 

HATEVER I say here to-night is said from the stand- 
point of a countryman and a republican. I could not 
divorce myself from those characteristics if I would, 
and I would not if I could. I make this statement because I 
want you to know the point of view from which I approach the 
subject under discussion. I hope that this confession will not 
be taken as, at most, more than presumptive evidence of 
criminal instincts on my part. 

At the same time I assure you that it is as nearly as possible 
a matter of indifference to me personally whether the system of 
direct primaries is to be put or kept in force or not. I do not 
much care who formulates, or what are, the rules of the political 
game, providing only they apply alike to all of us. Then, too, 
I have come to that time when I may, and perhaps love to, liken 
myself to the weather-beaten Palinurus who has furled the sail 
and put aside the oar, and no longer feels any personal interest 
in the rules governing navigation. 

This matter of direct primaries, or the reverse, is only a 
question of methods, a matter of difference as to how we shall 
take one of the steps in reaching a proper conduct of the affairs 
of the body politic. The direct primary never yet built a hos- 
pital to care for the wards of the state ; never yet improved our 
common-school system ; never helped solve the question of the 
congestion of population in cities ; never assisted to prevent the 
spread of contagious disease among the people ; never yet 
itself, as an end, was of the slightest consequence. It is a tool 
for the hand of the worker, and whether it fits his hand and 
best does his work, must be evidenced, not by the tool itself, 
but by the character of the finished work it does. 

It is well, at the outset, to know with reasonable accuracy the 

' Address at the dinner of the Academy of Political Science, October 26, 191 2. 

(220) 



THE ADVANTAGES OF THE CONVENTION 



173 



terms of the question we are discussing, It would be unfortu- 
nate that we should be rent in twain over the question, only to 
discover afterward that the differences were the outcome of a 
misunderstanding. Oliver Wendell Holmes, in one of that 
Breakfast Table series that delighted the students of forty years 
ago, tells of a religious quarrel resulting entirely from a differ- 
ence of definition. Let us be sure that we are not falling into 
any like dilemma. If this system of conventions, a system that 
has given to the country and to the world the records from 
Lincoln to Taft, of the state from Seward to Hughes — if this 
system is to be put on trial for its life, with premonitory warn- 
ings of summary conviction and execution, it is at least right 
and decent to have the indictment against it clearly read and 
its terms understood. 

Exactly what do those advocating direct primaries mean 
when they make their demand for a change from the conven- 
tion system, that has served us so well for a half-century? Do 
they want only some system by which electors, now deprived of 
their political privileges, are to have them restored? If so, 
some of us, who are now opposed, will be found on that side, 
once we are convinced that any one is now thus deprived of 
political privileges, and that this plan will restore them. 

But I take it, although I do not think that all the pros are 
united in it, that what is generally wanted when direct primaries 
are favored, is an abolition of physical getting together in 
caucus and convention, and an election within the party, sur- 
rounded by all the safeguards of an election between parties, 
where the elector may go, and without discussion, without 
meeting any one except the officials who are in charge,, may 
there cast his ballot for his choice. If anything more than an 
election within the party is intended, if it is desired that mem- 
bers of one party may go into the primaries of another and 
there vote on the nominations of such other party, I refuse 
to discuss any such scheme as preposterous — as almost in- 
famous. No plan is honest that permits a Democrat to par- 
ticipate in a Republican caucus, whose nominee he has no in- 
tention of supporting, or the reverse. But, assuming that I 
am right in diagnosing the demand as one for an intra-party 

(221) 



174 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vr.L. Ill 

selection of candidates, we have a right to know just how some 
of you think this will better present conditions. 

And, in asking this, those for whom I speak are not satisfied 
with the statement that the proposed scheme will down the 
bosses. This is not argument; it is mere assertion and pres- 
ently runs to mere rant, and it is not satisfying. How will it 
down the bosses? Some of us have been engaged for some 
years in an obscure, small way, in seeking that very result, — I 
might add seeking it when a little help from some of those now 
vociferous in their denunciations of the bosses would have been 
grateful to us, and potent in result, and when it was not given. 
But that is detail. 

It is said, however, that the change will down the bosses. 
Broad across one of the letters I received on the subject was 
the flaming slogan, " Direct nominations the cure for bosses." 
Oh, if it only were ! I believe that I would order my ascension 
robe. If we could but believe that the adoption of this doc- 
trine would really do the business and down the bosses — and 
keep any others from taking their places — if it were only true, 
I, for one — not one, Saul-like, suddenly converted, but with the 
conviction of years that the boss system is an unmitigated 
curse, — and those for whom I speak, would run like a bride- 
groom to his chamber to seize that boon, waiving in its favor 
everything not deemed essential to our system of government. 
But reflection and observation have convinced me that while 
direct primaries may change the personnel, they will leave the 
system of bossism more strongly intrenched in power than ever. 

Where do you spell out the relief you claim, in any place 
where it has been tried? Do you find Wisconsin emancipated 
from bossism under the rule of La Follette? Is Kansas less 
boss-ridden under Bristow and Murdock than it was under 
Ingalls and Plumb? Is Iowa freer in its political action 
between the knees of Cummins and his cohorts than it was 
under Allison and Shaw? 

The only other thing I have heard urged in favor of the 
change is that it will result in a wider participation by the 
people in the selection of candidates, will insure a more general 
participation by the people in matters political. 

(222) 



No. 2] THE ADVANTAGES OF THE CONVENTION 175 

I confess I can see no such prospective result. The problem 
for a decade has been to keep the people interested enough so 
that they will register and vote, and the cry has been that they 
have too much politics and will not attend. And so we have 
abolished spring town meetings and have done everything 
possible to render it easy for one to exercise the electoral 
franchise. How then the addition of another election day to 
the ones we already have will result in calling out a more gen- 
eral attendance and participation, it is difficult for the ordinary 
mind to comprehend. You do not satisfy the man who is com- 
plaining of overwork by doubling his hours of labor, even if 
you couple it with the suggestion that he will take more interest 
in his work. 

But some one says that some of the great states in the 
Middle West and the Northwest have legislated for direct 
primaries, and it is safe for the Empire State to follow. Let 
me recall a little of not very ancient history to you. I do not 
stand here unappreciative of the intelligence of the people of 
those states, I make no criticism of their efforts nor of their 
conception of that wherein they think they find their greatest 
good. If nothing else, a recollection of the years during which 
I lived among them and loved them, was one of them, would 
close my mouth to any harshness of comment upon any action 
of theirs, even if I believed that, like the men of Athens, they 
are continually going about seeking some new thing. But, 
when you ask us to accept this novelty into our system, be- 
cause of their action, I recall, as well within my personal recol- 
lection, that by the same sign we should have accepted their 
delusion of fiat money with all its crazy attachments and con- 
sequences, that a little later came the vagary of the free coinage 
of silver at the ratio of sixteen to one. I recall, too, that in some 
of the states having direct primaries, they have also the refer- 
endum and recall, and that wherever they have any one of these 
methods, they mean to have them all. If to-day you read into 
your party faith this doctrine of direct primaries, and it is fol- 
lowed by legislation, I warn you to prepare for both the refer- 
endum and the recall, for they will follow as surely as night 
follows day. Do not ask us to believe in this new faith, because 

(223) 



176 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

it has been adopted by Iowa and Kansas, by Wisconsin and 
Oregon. We must measure by our own yardstick and accept 
or reject by what is shown by it. 

Is the voter under the system of caucus and convention stifled 
in his right to make known his wants? If there is any one 
here from Rensselaer County let me inquire of him if he thinks 
so. I choose to interrogate someone from that county because, 
being a next-door neighbor, I know something of what a nice 
little, tight little machine they have had there for a generation. 
As we used to describe our fences out on the prairies, it was 
deemed horse-high, bull-strong and hog-tight, and yet but a 
little time since it was beaten to a peanut in the primaries by 
no machine at all. 

How was it with my other neighbor on the south, Schenectady, 
two years ago? That machine, with its captains of tens and its 
captains of hundreds, a machine strengthened and nourished by 
the canal, advised and helped by my friend Barnes, that behe- 
moth of organizers, in the same congressional district with it, 
was pounded into a pulp over night by men whom the machine 
deemed political nobodies and who, twenty-four hours before 
the convention, had not a semblance of a machine, not a thought 
of organization. Do you say that Schenectady needs direct 
primaries, to be properly represented in convention when you 
have that object-lesson before you? As I recall these inci- 
dents, do you tell me that caucuses and conventions are not 
responsive to public sentiment? 

I want to stand for the proposition that never yet has the 
wisdom of man devised a scheme for ascertaining the will of a 
free people so good as that of caucus and convention. The 
opportunity to come together, whether in the little caucus in 
the barn back in the alley, or in the large convention, to look 
each other level in the eyes, to tell, each to the other, the 
reasons actuating one, and to press one's views upon his 
fellow citizens, this is a privilege which, if awake to their true 
interests, the people will never consent to surrender. It is a 
method ingrained and bound up in the conduct of every other 
business involving the concurrence of different individuals. No 
board of directors of any corporation can legally act without a 

(224) 



No. 2] THE ADVANTAGES OF THE CONVENTION 177 

majority coming together. Separate concurrence by each 
director individually sending in his vote in writing reaches no 
legal action. And why? Because each member has the right 
to try to impress his views upon his fellows, and unless and 
until he has the opportunity to exercise that right, no result 
may be reached. Suppose that a jury, after hearing the evi- 
dence and the argum.ents of counsel, should separate, each man 
going to his own room and sending in his vote to the clerk — 
what sort of verdict would they reach in that way? 

The overruling power has constructed us on certain lines. 
One characteristic of humanity is that the attrition of mind with 
mind will promote harmony and reach a satisfactory result. It 
is so in matters political as in any other activity. And while 
it is so, you never can get a better system than one that lets 
this attrition have its full course and result. 

Is there any great religious body in the world that does not 
have its gathering? The Methodists come together every year 
in district conferences, and every four years in a general con- 
ference, country-wide in its sweep. The Baptists have their 
yearly meetings, the Presbyterians each year their general 
assembly. Rome has her consistories and her gatherings — and 
all because the wisdom of the ages has demonstrated that this 
is the truest method of ascertaining the wants of the members 
constituting the organization, and of conducting its business. 
There is scarcely a profession or a class of business that does 
not meet for conference. Shall we try to place the conduct of 
the business of a great party in a class by itself? 

But, says Professor Hart, the convention is sick. I shall not 
deny that imperfections exist in the system. And I would 
medicine them powerfully, but the measure you propose is not 
the true remedy to select from your political alexipharmics, to 
meet the case. 

The greatest evil in our conventions, state and national, has 
been the adoption of rules cutting off debate. Where you 
have free debate, you have begun the extinction of the boss. 
A convention where full discussion is, or may be had, is almost 
of necessity an unbossed convention. It may be that a candi- 
date or a measure can be bossed through the convention, but 
^ 2 ("5) 



178 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

the light there let in by a free discussion, renders later success 
so doubtful that such bossing will not be risked. 

Given a convention of a hundred members, no boss on earth 
can carry it against fifty-one of such members, if they have 
serious wishes on the subject. If an elector has no serious 
notions on the subject, nothing will protect him. And, after 
all, I am not sure but that it all comes down to having serious 
notions and being willing to fight for them. There is no 
method of procedure that will make a lion into a sheep, or a 
sheep into a lion. And I want to lay it down as a postulate, 
that nobody is ever really bossed politically, who, way down in 
his heart (whatever he may say about it) is not willing to be 
bossed. 

But it is said finally that the people want direct primaries and 
those opposed may as well yield, since opposition is useless. 
There are two ways of treating an agitation for some proposition 
you believe wrong. One is to yield to it, no matter how wrong; 
the other to argue it out and convince the people that it is 
wrong, or yourself be convinced. You cannot shirk the re- 
sponsibility by saying what someone else wants. The one test 
for you is, is it right? And until this question is settled right, 
it is not settled at all, and, in its settling, it is your duty not to 
consider any chances of successs or failure. 

Better, like Hector, on the field to die, 
Than, like the perfumed Paris, turn and fly. 

It isn't the fact that you're licked that counts, — but how did 
you fight, and why? 

I long ago reached the conclusion that whenever a majority 
of the people want a change that is within the lines of the con- 
stitution, they are entitled to have it. The minority must 
either accept it, or get out. But that fact does not lessen your 
duty or mine to oppose any innovation we think wrong, until it 
has been adopted — to prevent the change if we can. The 
trouble with the interpretation of the people's rights in these 
strenuous times is that to the undoubted and indubitable right 
of the majority to have what they want, there is attempted to 

(226) 



No. 2] THE ADVANTAGES OF THE CONVENTION 



179 



be grafted the doctrine that they have the right to have it the 
first fifteen minutes they think of it. No such right as that, 
constitutional or other, belongs to any one. It is no denial of 
constitutional government, it is no denial of the right of the 
majority to rule, to insist upon a reasonable time for reflection 
before changes are made. To the gospel of strenuousness 
there must be added the doctrine of thoughtfulness, or we have 
set sail on a dangerous sea. 

Mr. Chairman, I believe in representative government; with 
my whole being I believe in it. I believe in it for government. 
I believe in it for party. I believe in it as giving the largest 
measure of individual participation, with the surest result of 
deliberation and reflection. And I want to say to you that the 
fathers who, in their wisdom, established representative govern- 
ment in this land, did not do it from any lack of knowledge of 
the workings and of the exact value of a pure democracy. 
When they came together for the purpose of framing a govern- 
ment which would protect them and their descendants, as they 
hoped and prayed, to the latest generation, they did not select 
the representative forrti from all the forms then existing or 
theretofore existing, because they were ignorant of any of the 
virtues or merits of an unmixed democracy. They had studied 
the democracy of Greece, and knew its history. They remem- 
bered its treatment of Socrates; they did not forget the history 
of Aristides. They selected representative government because 
they believed, not that it gave the people the widest measure 
of direct and immediate influence upon the government at 
every moment of time, but because they believed that it as- 
sured that balance in government, that thoughtfulness in its 
conduct, without which it would not be worthy of the name, or 
survive the first shock of the storm. They believed, in doing 
this, they had so combined the right of every individual to 
be represented in the government, that it gave to every one 
a voice and an influence, but that at the same time it prevented 
the government from the shock of yielding to every sudden 
craze that should sweep over the people. And so they studied 
Magna Charta ; they studied the Petition of Rights; they 
studied the Bill of Rights; they studied the principles of the 

(227) 



l8o EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 

common law; and in making their framework, they omitted 
not one of them that made for enduring liberty. The result 
was what we have, and what I believe and what the broadening 
experience and study of the years makes me believe more and 
more, was the wisest and best solution of governmental questions 
that ever mortal brain gave out. And, having done it, having 
established the form of government in which they meant care- 
fully to preserve individual rights and, at the same time, to give 
that stability to government which they believed and I believe 
necessary, they " lived out their lease of life, and paid their 
debt to time and mortal custom," in the confident conviction 
that their work was wise and that they had succeeded where all 
others had failed. 

The burden rests upon us — upon you and me, not as a gen- 
eral, far-off proposition, but here and now, not alone in the 
question we are here discussing, but in all the successive prob- 
lems in government that come to us, to see to it that we neither 
do, nor without protest permit to be done anything that will 
diminish our heritage. 

We must not be reactionary, but we must see to it that, no 
matter how rapid the progress, it shall be along lines that the 
experience of the past pronounces good. 

(228) 



STATEMENTS ON DIRECT PRIMARIES^ 

Job E. Hedges, Candidate of the Republican party for gov- 
ernor of New York : 

In the canvass of the state which preceded my nomination 
for governor at Saratoga, I visited nearly every section of New 
York, appealing directly to the voters without previously seek- 
ing the sanction of anyone. My belief was, and still is, that 
the voters are entitled to such a procedure. To have done 
otherwise and to have relied upon influence which entails 
rewards, was to have abandoned the right of free speech and 
free conduct. Belief in the people and in the direct primary, 
so-called, is shown in practise and not in rhetorical expression. 

The announcement of my candidacy stated : 

If elected governor I shall consider it a binding obligation to stimulate 
popular interest in public questions, and to endeavor to provide there- 
for, by law, means of expression, simple and direct. Whenever new 
conditions shall arise requiring statutory provision, enactments of the 
legislature passed in expression of the popular will and making govern- 
ment by the people real and not a fiction will meet executive approval. 

That was my pledge then and is my pledge now. 

The successful candidate for governor must command public 
confidence regardless of party affiliations. People must believe 
in his character, constructive ability and unqualified independ- 
ence. The four most distinctive issues in the state campaign 
are : Personal obligation and individual responsibility in all 
social and political matters ; honest, economical and efficient 
administration ; the attempted solution of the high cost of liv- 
ing and a more practicable working out of the ends of social 
justice. 

Within the category of the first clause falls the direct primary. 
With regard to this issue as with respect to the whole subject 
of primary and general elections, I tried to sum up the whole 

' Read at the dinner of the Academy of Political Science, October 25, 1912. 

(229) 

1 2 • 



1 82 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

subject in a speech at Madison Lake in July before an assemb- 
lage of farmers, and specifically with relation to the Ferris- 
Blauvelt primary law and the Levy election law. 

If I am elected Governor I will urge an immediate repeal of 
the Ferris-Blauvelt primary law. It is involved, cumbersome, 
burdensome to tax payers, full of chicanery and obviously in- 
tended to sicken people of the direct primary idea. As a sub- 
stitute I should recommend the enactment of a law which would 
permit the voter to express at the primary his preference as to 
nominations and party control by the simplest and most direct 
means, leaving, until the experiment can be worked out to a 
practicable conclusion, the convention plan as to governor and 
state offices. I should veto any act which made of either 
primary or general election ballot a puzzle. The ballot should 
be so simple that every voter could comprehend it. I should 
not favor any act which placed insuperable obstacles in the way 
of independent voting. As a Republican partisan I am abso- 
lutely and unqualifiedly in favor of a primary and an election 
law in consonance with the unmistakable meaning of the con- 
stitution. Such an act would not only be a recognition of the 
inalienable right of citizenship, but also, from my point of view, 
the very best policy in politics. I should endeavor, however, 
to make the people understand that no primary law is or can 
be of itself a panacea. At best it can be only a means to an 
end and an instrumentality of correction. No primary act can 
be effective to a greater degree than the willingness of the 
people to advantage themselves of the opportunity to express 
their preference. Further than this, a primary act is useful 
only as an instrumentality through which the people can readily 
punish their political leaders when those leaders disregard their 
obligation to their party and the public. 

I should veto any act which, like the Wisconsin law, seems, 
as shown in the Stephenson senatorial investigation, to handicap 
ability and conviction and to put the ambitious rich man and 
the ambitious poor man on an unequal basis. The limitation 
of the amount of campaign expenditures, however, is not so 
important as the precise definition, in a corrupt practises act, 
of the purposes for which money can and cannot be expended ; 

(230) 



No. 2] STATEMENTS ON DIRECT PRIMARIES 183 

and in conjunction with that, a periodic pubHshed statement of 
contributions and expenses. 

As governor I should feel it my duty to veto any act which 
would facilitate vote-trading between the parties, as under some 
western laws, under which men may connive at weak and unfit 
nominations in order to bring about the election of others in 
the service of some special interest, or may conspire in defeat- 
ing the nomination of a strong man and in favor of a weak man 
who could be more easily beaten at the polls. These I regard 
as the great defects in most of the primary acts either proposed 
or now upon the statute books. 

As governor, I should urge the immediate repeal of the Levy 
election law. It is inequitable, burdensome to taxpayers and 
obviously intended to defeat that free and independent expres- 
sion of the popular will which is the clear and unmistakable 
intent of both state and national constitutions. In place of the 
Levy law I should urge the enactment of a statute which 
would, in the first place, prevent illegal voting so far as it is 
possible so to do, and in the second place, give facility under 
proper limitations to independent voting. I should conceive it 
my duty as governor to stimulate public interest in the primary 
and general elections, and to safeguard both through effective 
statutes. The most important end to attain, to my mind, is the 
formulation and enactment of a corrupt practises act which 
shall make no discrimination between primary and general 
elections, but which, on the contrary, shall amply safeguard 
both, through the following means, (which I advocated in an 
address in June) and which were evolved out of my experience 
as deputy attorney general in prosecution of election frauds in 
New York city : 

There should and could be, as a matter of law, provision made whereby 
the burden of proof of illegal voting either at primary or election day 
should be shifted so that in prosecuting offenders prosecuting officers 
or complaining citizens might not be compelled to bear the entire 
burden of proof and establish beyond all question of doubt that a man 
is not entitled to vote. Of course, in criminal procedure the burden 
of proof is on the prosecutor, and the man charged with crime is 
entitled to the benefit of the doubt and the presumption of innocence. 

(231) 



1 84 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol.111 

This rule cannot be abrogated in the prosecution of political criminals 
more than of others. But in getting back to first principles, you can 
lay the burden of demonstrating a right to vote upon the enrolled or 
registered voter so that he must establish by his own affidavit and 
proof if necessary, so affirmatively and clearly his legal right to vote 
that when the prosecution comes it is made easier for those who are 
seeking to use the law to protect the suffrage to secure conviction. 

No man can consistently object to meeting such requirements 
and proving his right to vote at the primary or general election, 
when not to do so gives opportunity to the evil-minded either 
to vote when having no right so to do, or to vote more than 
once. To do either of the latter is to rob some one of his right 
of franchise. To rob another of the right of franchise destroys 
the most sacred right of citizenship, prevents majority rule and 
is the most dastardly crime against republican institutions. Let 
me say here that the constitutional institution of the short 
ballot is to my mind the fundamental prerequisite to the insti- 
tution of a just and comprehensive direct primary statute. 

With relation to the operation of a direct primaries act let 
me say that the handicap must in any primary or general elec- 
tion rest upon the unorganized sentiment. Order and organi- 
zation are the first laws of the universe. Organization is the 
first law of society. The army is effective only to the degree 
in which its individuals act as a unit, and only up to the point 
where individuality and individual initiative are absorbed in the 
personality and initiative of a single individual or a number of 
individuals. So it is must be with partisan political organizations. 

To my mind a machine is generically an organization that 
has become enervated through inbreeding, resulting in crass 
selfishness and despotism. As a drilling organization a 
machine, up to a certain fixed point, is a delight to the mind ; 
as a potential fighting organization a machine becomes impotent 
the moment its members lose their individuality and spirit of 
initiative. 

You cannot legislate into the heart of any citizen a sense of 
civic duty. We have not as yet brought ourselves to the point 
where we believe it necessary to compel the citizen to partici- 
pate in those activities which pertain directly to him and to his 

(232) 



No. 2] STATEMENTS ON DIRECT PRIMARIES 185 

own personal welfare and that of his neighbors. It is not pos- 
sible with any kind of direct primary, I do not care what its 
terms and provisions may be, to compel the people to recognize 
and understand the fact that the primary is the very source and 
wellspring of good or bad citizenship and that, therefore, they 
are worthy of citizenship only to the extent to which they indi- 
vidually actively participate in the choosing of their candidates 
and nominees. No primary act has yet been devised, and 
maybe one cannot be in our day, that will bring to the polls on 
primary day the same number of men who vote on the day of 
general election, for the reason that all the voters have not yet 
accepted understandingly the fact that the primary is fully as 
important as the general election, if not even more important. 

What a practicable, fair and proper direct primary law can 
do when such a law is formulated and placed on the statute 
books is to afford to the people at a time of emergency an 
instrumentality through which they can directly and easily 
apply a remedy for mismanagement and malfeasance. There- 
fore it is not to be wondered at and should not have been 
regarded as indicative of inherent weakness that the president- 
ial primaries were participated in by a much smaller number of 
persons than ordinarily vote at a presidential election. It will 
be only when the voting public regards its civic duty in proper 
perspective that the primaries will reach, so far as the number 
of votes cast is concerned, the importance of a general election. 

I believe in the simplest and most direct means of public ex- 
pression. I do not believe that a primary or election law 
should make of a ballot a preposterous puzzle. It should be 
so simple that the most ingenuous and simple mind could use 
it understandingly. I do not believe intended obstacles should 
stand in the way of independent voting. On the conti.ury, a 
law which practically inhibits fusing or independent voting is a 
two-edged sword. Always it happens that a fusing or inde- 
pendent movement helps one party or another, one individual 
or another, one faction or another. As a Republican partisan 
I am, as I have said, absolutely and unqualifiedly in favor of a 
primary law and an election law which will permit ease in 
independent voting. 

(233) 



1 86 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 

This is, I repeat, not only a recognition of the inalienable 
rights of citizenship, but also, to my mind, the very best policy 
and politics. There is no doubt that independent movements 
are more often directed against individuals than against parties, 
and that they are properly inimical to any rule-or-ruin policy 
of leadership. This is absolutely as it should be, for no leader- 
ship is worthy of respect that will not consider the rights of 
others and the rules of fair play. To my mind leadership 
springs from the heart and has its roots in human understand- 
ing and responds to public needs with human sympathy. A 
man who regards leadership as a proposition in absolutism, as 
a game and not as a duty, as a selfish interest and not as a 
human obligation, is unworthy of a place at the head of any 
party or of any organization, and the law should make it easy 
for the party voters to oppose and depose unworthy men who 
ill-use the powers, prerogatives and privileges of leadership. 

Oscar S. Straus, candidate of the National Progressive 
party for governor of New York : 

The question of primary reform is no new one to me. In 
New York in 1898 the first National Primary League was 
formed and held its meetings in the rooms of the board of trade 
and transportation. I had the honor of presiding over this 
convention during the three days of its sessions. At that tim.e 
I advocated such reforms in nominating methods as would 
place the control of the nominating process more completely 
in the hands of the voters of each party. 

For the last three years of his term. Governor Hughes 
devoted more time and energy to primary reform than to any 
other problem. Against the bitter opposition of both the 
Rep-^K^iican and the Democratic organization he advocated a 
thorough-going, state-wide system of direct primaries. Up to 
the present time, however, his efforts have been to all intents 
and purposes without tangible results. All the political parties 
are now at least nominally committed to the principle of the 
direct primary — and gcticral arguments in favor of this system 
as against the convention system are therefore superfluous — 
but we are still without any real or honest embodiment of this 

(234) 



No. 2 ] ST A TEMENTS ON DIRECT PRIMARIES \ % 7 

principle in the form of law. The so-called direct primary law 
of 191 1, enacted by a Democratic legislature with the help of 
the Republican machine, is an absolute negation of all that 
Governor Hughes fought for, a denial of the very foundation 
principle of the direct primary. Instead of giving to the rank 
and file of the party voters an effective control over the nomi- 
nating process, it merely rivets more firmly than ever the grip 
of the machine, and gives to what was formerly an unrecognized 
and unofficial machine dictation the sanction of legal recogni- 
tion. It does this: first, by conferring upon party committees 
— chosen, not as under the Hughes plan, but by a process which 
makes them virtually self-perpetuating — the power to designate 
or propose candidates for nomination to public ofifice; second, 
by making it exceedingly difficult for anyone else in the party 
to propose alternative candidates; third, by providing for an 
official primary ballot — the like of which has never been seen 
before under the primary law of any other state — of such a 
form that none but the candidates proposed by party com- 
mittees stand any real chance of being nominated; and, fourth, 
by omitting from the application of the law the very offices in 
which the voters are most interested, and thus discouraging 
them from attending the primaries. 

As if not content with their handiwork, and desirous of an 
even more cast-iron control over nominations, the Republican 
and Democratic machines combined at the session of 191 2 to 
pass an amendment to this law permitting the party organiza- 
tions to make the assembly district, instead of the election 
district, the unit of representation in the choice of party commit- 
tees. This permission was promptly taken advantage of by both 
organizations, with the result that the party voter in New York 
city at the primaries last March instead of being called upon to 
elect from one to eight members of the county committee of 
his party was asked to choose from seventy- five to four hun- 
dred members. The result as to other committees and in 
other parts of the state was almost equally absurd. The pri- 
mary ballots were from six to fourteen feet in length ; it was 
practically impossible for any independent element in either 
party to run a rival ticket for party offices against that proposed 

(23s) 



I 8 8 EFFICIENT GO VERNMENT [Vol. 1 1 1 

by the "organization;" and the whole operation of this sham 
direct primary system was rendered ridiculous. 

So much for the type of primary law favored by the two old 
parties. Both of them promise amendments at the coming 
session, but the kind of amendment which we may expect from 
either of them is well indicated by the amendment which they 
passed last year. 

Without going into details, it is most important to apply the 
direct primary law to all public offices and party positions, 
including United States senators and delegates to national party 
conventions, and excluding only such 'minor local offices as 
were excluded under the Hinman-Green bill. To such an 
extension both the old parties are definitely opposed — but if 
the direct primary system is sound and desirable as applied to 
all other offices, why should it not be applied to the most im- 
portant offices of all, the very offices in which the voters are 
most interested and in regard to which they have the clearest 
and strongest preferences? The opponents of such an exten- 
sion will reply that it is sufficient that the party voters should 
have power to " instruct " the delegates to the state convention 
as to their preference for state officers. Even assuming, how- 
ever, that such instructions, when clear and unanimous, will be 
carried out by the convention — an assumption by no means 
certain to be justified, — it is wholly unfair to the voters to ex- 
pect them, with no more information or assistance than is 
supplied them under the convention system, even to have any 
clear preference as to party candidates, to say nothing of taking 
the trouble to go to the polls and express it when they have no 
assurance that such an expression of their opinion will produce 
any result. Up to the time the primaries are held there has 
been, under the present system, no adequate public discussion 
of the merits of the various candidates for nomination. The 
candidates have not come forward and conducted a campaign 
to acquaint the voters with their personalities or their views. 
Their names do not appear on the official primary ballot which 
is handed to the voter at the polling-place. All that he has be- 
fore him is a list of names of eminently respectable and other- 
wise colorless gentlemen who are seeking election as delegates 

(236) 



No. 2 J STATEMENTS ON DIRECT PRIMARIES 189 

to the state convention, and who have been carefully picked 
out beforehand by the leaders of the " organization" as persons 
who can be relied upon to do what they are told. There is 
nothing to indicate whom these gentlemen favor as party candi- 
dates for the various state offices — indeed, they often have very 
little idea themselves. The ballot seldom contains the names 
of any opposing list of candidates for the positions of delegates 
— chiefly for the reason that there is at this time no issue on 
which any fight against the organization candidates can be made 
except that of their personalities or the general issue of opposi- 
tion to the " organization," which as yet has not shown its hand. 
The voters, in short, are merely asked to give a blind power of 
attorney to the " organization," which, later on, will announce 
through its mouthpiece, the convention, whom it has selected. 
Under this system the task of the voters, at best, is to suggest. 
It remains for the " organization " to decide. I beHeve, on the 
contrary, in a system under which the " organization " will sug- 
gest and the party voters finally decide. Let the " organiza- 
tion " be given the right, together with any other groups within 
the party, to propose candidates for nomination. Let these 
candidates go before the party voters and present their claims 
to the nomination, so that the party voters, when they go to the 
primaries, may decide between them as intelligently and with 
as complete information as to their merits as possible. But let 
the party voters themselves have the last word. 

I believe all the more strongly in applying the direct primary 
principle to state offices because the statistics from other states 
show that where this is done the popular vote at the primaries 
is larger than in those states where only local officers are directly 
nominated. Since the chief purpose of the direct primary is to 
secure as full and representative an expression of opinion as 
possible within each party, every factor which serves to mcrease 
the popular vote at the primaries should be taken advantage of 
to the fullest extent. 

Another reason why I favor the extension of our direct prim- 
ary law to state offices is that, in other states, wherever the 
direct primary system has been adopted for certain local elec- 
tions, its application has almost always been subsequently ex- 

(237) 



ipo 



EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT [Vol. Ill 



tended, and in twenty-eight states direct nominations are now 
mandatory for practically all elective offices. In six other 
southern states the system is optional, but under the rules of the 
Democratic party, practically all elective officers are nominated 
at legally regulated direct primaries. In only four states out- 
side of New York is the application of the system still limited 
to local offices. Surely the experience of the rest of the coun- 
try has something to teach us on this point. 

But our direct primary law should not merely be extended to 
apply to the state offices in its present form. It should also be 
amended so as to provide for an official primary ballot of the 
office-group type, such as is now in use in every other state 
which has adopted the direct primary system. Our present 
form of primary ballot, with its separate column for each fac- 
tion, its permission to the organization within the party to use 
the emblem of the party as a whole to designate its own candi- 
dates for nomination, its provision that the name of a candidate 
for nomination may appear in only one column, and its special 
provision for straight ticket voting, is cunningly devised to give 
the organization an impregnable position and absolutely prevent 
all independent action within the party. We should adopt a 
form of ballot on which all candidates for nomination are 
placed upon an absolute equality. 

Another most urgently needed amendment to our present 
law is one providing for a reduction in the number of signatures 
required to place a candidate's name on the official primary 
ballot by petition. At present such petitions must be signed 
by at least five per cent of the enrolled part>' voters in the dis- 
trict and four per cent of the total party vote for governor in 
the district at the last preceding gubernatorial election. This 
requirement often renders the proposal of candidates for nom- 
ination by any group within the party other than the organiza- 
tion practically impossible. It should be altered for the same 
reasons which demand a change in the form of the primary 
ballot. 

In order, furthermore, to prevent any repetition of the ab- 
surdly long ballots used at the primaries last spring, and to put 
into force within the party the same short ballot principle 

(238) 



No. 2] STATEMENTS ON DIRECT PRIMARIES 



191 



which we are advocating for public offices, the use of the elec- 
tion district, instead of the assembly district, as the unit of 
representation in the choice of party committees should be made 
mandatory. The same principle demands that only the most 
important party committees be made elective by the party 
voters. These amendments would remedy the worst defects in 
the existing law. 

In conclusion I wish to call attention to the fact that the di- 
rect primary is not the only method which, in full accordance 
with the Progressive platform, I am earnestly advocating for the 
purpose of giving to the people a more complete control over 
their government. The adoption of the short ballot system for 
public offices is particularly important as a corollary to the di- 
rect primary, since without it the task of the voter in making 
nominations will be left unnecessarily complicated, and his con- 
trol over the nominating process correspondingly impaired.- 
This does not mean that we should postpone the enactment of 
a thorough-going direct primary law until after we have amended 
the constitution to provide for the short ballot, but it does 
mean that we should supplement our direct primary law by a 
shortening of the ballot as soon as possible. 

Wm. Sulzer, candidate of the Democratic party for gover- 
nor of New York: I am in favor of simplifying the ballot, 
extending the corrupt practises act, and instituting direct prim- 
aries. I have been advocating these reforms ever since I was 
in the legislature twenty years ago. In cooperation with the 
late Senator Saxton, I passed the first ballot reform law and 
the first corrupt practises act when we were in the legislature, 
and from that day to this I have been doing everything in 
my power to promote these salutary reforms. In the future, 
as in the past, the people of New York can rely on me to take 
no step backward. 

(239) 



PROCEEDINGS OF THE AUTUMN MEETING OF THE 

ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE HELD IN 

NEW YORK, OCTOBER 25 AND 26, 1912 

THE autumn meeting of the Academy of Political Science 
held in New York on October 25 and 26, 191 2, dealt 
with Efficient Government. Three sessions were held 
at Earl Hall, Columbia University. The program was as follows : 

FIRST SESSION 
Friday afternoon, October 25 

Topic 
The Selection and Removal of Judges 

Introductory address 

Harlan F. Stone 
The Elective and Appointive Methods of Selection of Judges 

Learned Hand 
The Recall of Judges 

Gilbert E. Roe 

y. Hampden Dougherty 
Discussion by Richard S. Childs, Everett P. Wheeler, 
Charles H. Hartshorne and Edward D. Page 

THIRD SESSION 
Saturday morning, October 26 

Topic 

The Adaptation of Written Constitutions to Chang- 
ing Social Conditions 
Introductory address 
Munroe Smith 
Judicial Interpretation of Constitutional Provisions 
Fra?ik J. Goodnow 

(240) 



PROCEEDINGS OF THE AUTUMN MEE'J ING 193 

The Amendment of the Federal Constitution 

J . David Thompson 
The Reorganization of State Government 

Henry Jones Ford 
The Recall of Judicial Decisions 

William Draper Lewis 

Clarence D. Ashley 
Discussion by Henry R. Seager 

FOURTH SESSION 
Saturday afternoon, October 26 

Topic 
Legislation and Administration 

Initiative and Referendum 

Paul S. Reinsch 
The Federal Budget 

Frederick A. Cleveland 
Efficient Organization of the Personnel in Administration 

W. F. Willoughby 
Legislative Drafting 

Thomas /. Parki?iso?i 

Harlan F. Stone, Dean of the Law School of Columbia Uni- 
versity, presided at the first session, and Munroe Smith, Pro- 
fessor of Roman law and comparative jurisprudence in Columbia 
University, presided at the third and fourth sessions. 



CONFERENCE DINNER 

The second session was the regular conference dinner held 
at the Hotel Astor on Friday evening, October 25, President 
Samuel McCune Lindsay presiding. 

The general topic for discussion was " The Direct Primary 
versus the Convention Method of Choosing Candidates for 
Public Office." 

Addresses were made by Albert Bushnell Hart, Professor of 

(341) 
1 3 



194 EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 

Government in Harvard University and by the Hon. Edgar T. 
Brackett, of the New York state senate. 

Statements on direct primaries by the three leading candi- 
dates for governor of New York, Messrs. Hedges, Straus and 
Sulzer, were read. Mr. Hedges was represented by Mr. John 
A. Stewart, State Chairman of the RepubHcan Party; Mr. 
Straus by Mr. William H. Hotchkiss, State Chairman of the 
National Progressive Party; and Mr. Sulzer by Col. Alexander 
S. Bacon. 

The papers read at the sessions, the discussions, and the 
addresses and statements at the dinner are printed elsewhere 
in this volume. 

(242) 



PROCEEDINGS OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF 
TRUSTEES IN CONFERRING HONORARY MEM- 
BERSHIP UPON THE RIGHT HONORABLE 
JAMES BRYCE 

AT a meeting held on January 8, 191 3, the Board of Trus- 
tees of the Academy of Political Science, acting in 
accordance with the powers conferred by article IV of 
the constitution, created a class of honorary members and 
elected the Honorable James Bryce, British Ambassador to the 
United States, as the first honorary* member. 

A special meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Academy 
was held in the trustees' room of Columbia University on Fri- 
day, February 24, at four o'clock. To this meeting the life 
members of the Academy and a few special guests were invited. 
Upon the arrival of Mr. and Mrs. Bryce, Professor Samuel 
McCune Lindsay, President of the Academy, called the meeting 
to order and explained its purpose. In behalf of the trustees, 
President Nicholas Murray Butler, a member of the advisory 
council of the Academy, presented to Mr. Bryce a certificate 
of membership, handsomely engrossed and bound in leather 
covers. President Butler referred to Mr. Bryce's distinguished 
public services and his notable contributions to political science, 
expressing the hope that he might employ the leisure following 
his retirement in formulating an interpretation of the whole 
modern democratic movement. 

Mr. Bryce responded in a happy speech, expressing his 
interest in the Academy, his pleasure in becoming its first 
honorary member and his belief in the importance of the work 
of such institutions in America. In closing he referred to the 
possible services of the United States in forwarding the cause 
of arbitration and world peace. 

Following this meeting the Academy tendered a reception to 
Mr. and Mrs. Bryce in Earl Hall. All the members and many 
guests were invited and several hundred persons attended, 

(243) 



1 3 • 



THE BRYCE MEETING [Vol. Ill 



Introductory Remarks of Professor Samuel McCune 

Lindsay, President of the Academy of Political 

Science 

This special meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Academy 
of Political Science has been called at a time when Mr. Bryce 
could be with us, for the purpose of giving added emphasis to 
the action already taken by the Board at its meeting on January 
8, when Mr. Bryce was elected the first honorary member of 
the Academy. 

Over thirty-two years ago this Academy was organized by a 
small group of men inspired by the greatest scholar and teacher 
in the field of political science that America has produced, our 
own Dean Burgess, who was then just beginning the great work 
he has now laid down here at Columbia, and in the fruits of 
whose labor most of us here to-day have peculiar reason to 
rejoice. For many years the Academy restricted its efforts to 
building up high standards of scientific work and to encouraging 
productive scholarship in political science. 

An organization with such an aim was much needed at that 
time and the influence of the Academy was potent in the some- 
what narrow circle of the teaching profession and of the few 
specialists, chiefly lawyers, who gave some scientific considera- 
tion to the problems of government. 

With the passing of the years have come new problems in 
our public life. The relations of citizens to government have 
changed and educational institutions must undertake a new work 
in preparing citizens for ideal participation in democratic gov- 
ernment. The Academy has proved sufficiently elastic in its 
organization to respond to these new needs, and within the last 
five years it has undergone almost a complete change in its 
activities. It aspires to be a real educational force in our 
American democracy, bringing the studies of the specialist and 
the highly educated professional man to the average man and 
the average woman who must needs participate in government 
and upon whose intelligence and efficiency the possibilities of 

(244) 



No. 3] REMARKS OF SAMUEL MCCUNE LINDSAY 3 

government depend. It aims to popularize the growing litera- 
ture of political science, without loss of scientific value, to 
stimulate active discussion of the facts, conditions and problems 
of government as it affects the ordinary man. 

In this work the Academy has enlisted the cooperation of 
over two thousand of our fellow-citizens. Its membership is 
open to men and women alike who are willing to share in its 
work. The Political Science Quarterly holds a foremost place 
in the scientific world, and as the organ of the Academy, so 
ably edited by the faculty of political science of this university, 
brings us into close affiliation with the scientific life of the uni- 
versity. The Academy does not propose as it grows in num- 
bers and resources to weaken the influence of such publications 
as the Political Science Quarterly, but if possible to extend and 
strengthen such influence through the addition of other publi- 
cations like our Proceedings, and, possibly, a still more popular 
periodical yet to be issued, adapted to the needs of a wider 
circle of intelligent men and women anxious to know more 
about government and to do their part to aid in the establish- 
ment of rational and sound public opinion. 

In this work and in the creation of the ideals which it pre- 
supposes, we are already indebted to Mr. Bryce as to no other 
writer in the English-speaking world. No one has done more 
than he to give us a clear vision of the possibilities of democ- 
racy ; no one has voiced more clearly the challenge of democracy 
to the forces of education. We shall miss him all the more 
when he leaves our shores, because he has been so vitally iden- 
tified with the deeper currents of American life and American 
thought. In his home land or wherever he may be, however, 
we shall not lose him so long as he has voice or pen to con- 
tribute to the thought of his time and to the wisdom of all ages. 
We shall now count upon him, as our first honorary member, 
for counsel and guidance, and we shall ever look to him as an 
example of the ideal citizen who serves. 

I now have the honor, by authority of this Board, to ask 
President Butler, a member of the advisory council of the 
Academy, to present to Mr. Bryce a certificate of honorary 
membership. 

.'245) 



THE BRYCE MEETING [Vol. Ill 



Remarks of Nicholas Murray Butler, President of 
Columbia University, in presenting certificate of 
honorary membership in the Academy of Political 
Science to Ambassador Bryce 

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Bryce: 

My colleagues have given me the grateful privilege of trans- 
mitting to you, sir, this formal certificate to mark the honorary 
relation in which they are glad to know that you are hereafter 
to stand to this Academy. 

In handing you this document, I find it difficult to withhold 
one or two personal words. My mind goes back, sir, nearly 
thirty years to the beginnings of a strong friendship and of that 
sort of admiration which a younger man is sometimes fortu- 
nately permitted to have for his elder, when in your library, 
first in Bryanston Square and afterwards in Portland Place, we 
used to spend delightful mornings in discussing public affairs, 
the movement of public opinion, and the literature of political 
science and of philosophy. It was then and there that, through 
your courtesy and kindly hospitality, I had the opportunity and 
the high privilege of meeting and of coming to know so many 
of the men who were at that time leading the opinion of the 
British people and formulating the issues of British politics. 

At that time, sir, as you will easily recall, the first bills for 
the government of Ireland were being drafted and presented 
for formal consideration. It has taken all the intervening years 
for the political movements and the political tendencies in which 
we were then so keenly interested to move forward to the ac- 
complishment of the result which, by the recent vote of the 
House of Commons, seems now to be substantially assured. 

To this personal word, let me add something more. You 
have stood in a peculiar relation to those of us who are students 
of public affairs, and especially to those of us who have had 
some part in the shaping of international opinion and in the 
conduct of international relations. One of our colleagues at 
this university, who has the happy and inveterate habit of mix- 

(246) 



No. 3] REMARKS OF NICHOLAS MURRA Y BUTLER 5 

ing wit with his wisdom, has said that it was given to you to 
invent the Holy Roman Empire and to discover the American 
Commonweahh. We are glad that you have given us the two 
well-known books on these subjects. But you have done much 
more than that. Somewhere in your writings — I think it was 
in your biographical essay on your friend, Lord Acton — you 
have made a statement which has seemed to me to be very true 
of yourself, namely, that in estimating the great things of his- 
tory Lord Acton had not overlooked the significance of the 
smaller things and so had not lost his sense of proportion in 
dealing with matters of history and politics. 

Let me say, too, with what pleasure some of us have been 
reading your newest and very illuminating book on South 
America. One characteristic of that book, in particular, has 
impressed me, and that is that out of the wealth of your per- 
sonal knowledge and out of your wide travel in each of the 
continents of the world you have gained material for compara- 
tive and instructive judgments as to mountain ranges, plains, 
products of the soil, lines and routes of travel — judgments that 
have made your account of what you have seen in these South 
American republics by far the most helpful that has yet 
been written by anyone. In that book not only have you given 
us a record of what you saw there, but you have given us that 
record in terms of what you had already so widely seen else- 
where. 

Greatly to the regret not only of our government but of our 
whole people, you are now about to retire from the great post 
that has been been distinguished by your occupancy. We can 
let you go, sir, only on the condition that you will devote the 
years that are to come to illuminating for us some of the dark 
places that still remain in the public life and thought of the 
world. We greatly hope that out of your visits to South Africa, 
to Australia, to Canada, to Latin America, and out of your wide 
and minute knowledge of the United States, there may yet 
come a critical study and interpretation of the whole modern 
democratic movement. We need this study and interpretation 
of democracy, not only from the point of view of political 

(247) 



6 THE BRYCE MEETING [Vol. Ill 

institutions, but from that of its personal, its social, and its 
economic results, together with its effect upon individual human 
beings and upon the life and progress of humanity as a whole. 

You go from us to assume a new honor. You are to be one 
of the panel of judges representing Great Britain from which is 
constituted on occasion the great supreme international court 
of arbitral justice at The Hague, a court which you have labored 
to establish and in the principles underlying which you pro- 
foundly believe. It is grateful to think that the court is to be 
the forerunner of a number of influential international institu- 
tions that shall help bind the nations of the earth together in 
unity and concord, and to free both men and nations from the 
crushing burdens of armaments and from the fears and terrors 
out of which they grow. 

And so, sir, in handing you this certificate of membership, I 
do so on behalf of this company of friends, friends who have 
become such through knowledge of your personality, through 
the sympathetic and attentive following of your public career. 
When you go back to Great Britain to take up the duties that 
await you there, you carry with you the full weight of the 
affection and regard of the American people, and of none more 
than those who are assembled in this room, who have formed 
the habit of looking up to you as a guide and philosopher, and 
as a true and well-tried friend. 



Reply of Ambassador Bryce 

Mr. President, Professor Lindsay and Gentlemen: 

I can hardly find words to express my sense of the honor 
you have done me and of the gratification given me, both by 
the honorary membership in your Academy which has been 
conferred upon me, and also by the terms in which that has 
been conveyed to me by my old and valued friend, the president 
of your university, and by Professor Lindsay. 

It would be superfluous for me to attempt to say — because I 
know that you must feel yourselves — how large a part friend- 
ship has had in dictating the words which President Butler has 

(248) 



No. 3] REPLY OF JAMES BRYCE 7 

let fall ; it would be superfluous for me to say that the words he 
has used express an estimate of my aspirations rather than of 
my achievements. Nevertheless I am cheered by his words 
and by your kindness to believe that some good may have been 
done and I am encouraged to use whatever of life and strength 
may remain to me in the persevering endeavor to elucidate 
some of these complex phenomena of government whose com- 
prehension will enable us in some measure to understand other 
countries in their reality, and to appreciate the character of 
their people. 

I do not think that any greater service can be conferred upon 
the world by learned men who are trying to find solutions for 
all the problems that press upon us than by the creation of 
bodies such as this Academy, bodies which devote themselves 
to a scientific investigation of government, economics, adminis- 
tration, and what is called social science in general. You here 
are confronted by a number of problems probably more difficult 
and intricate than any other country has ever had to face. In 
some ways they are more complex than in Europe ; yet in 
many respects they are not so dangerous, and often they are 
easier to face than the problems of European countries. No 
greater service can be rendered toward the solution of these 
problems than by the cultivation of patient and impartial 
thought. Thought governs the world ; seeming to be ruled by 
votes, the world is actually ruled by thought. All the great 
movements of the world have begun from the thought of a 
comparatively small number of geniuses marking out the lines ; 
they were followed by others who devoted their lives to de- 
veloping the ideas and examining the facts to which the 
principles ought to be applied. 

The need was never greater than now. Just because we are 
apt to be carried away by popular passion, it is the more neces- 
sary that all these things should be investigated by such a body 
as your Academy in the spirit that I have sought to indicate. 
It is not merely the political problems, urgent though they be, 
to which I refer. I speak also of economic problems, which 
are becoming increasingly important with the immense increase 

(249) 



8 THE BRYCE MEETING [Vol. Ill 

of wealth, the development of communication and transporta- 
tion, and the growth of those closer relations which now exist 
between all parts of the world. I have likewise in mind what 
we call social questions. There is a surprising growth of active 
philanthropy. There is a stronger feeling than ever before of 
the responsibility of the rich for the poor and of the necessity 
of applying our ethical and religious principles to bettering the 
lot of those who most need it. The difficulty is to know how 
to do it. The difficulty is to know how you can help others 
without superseding the help which they ought to give them- 
selves. In all that immense field there is need for the closest 
study of social schemes and theories and of the methods of 
social reform that ought to be adopted. I believe that your 
Academy will be just as useful in grappling with these social 
problems as it will in dealing with political questions. 

I should like, in saying that, to express the recognition of 
our English students of the value of your journal, the Political 
Science Quarterly, which is so ably edited by the university 
faculty of political science. We have nothing like it in our own 
country, and I am not sure that a similar publication would 
secure the number of readers necessary for its support. I have 
read it assiduously since its foundation and I have never opened 
it without being enlightened, and I sincerely hope that under 
the auspices of the Academy it will continue to flourish and 
render service to you and to us as it has done heretofore. 

I will only add further, Mr. President, that I am deeply 
touched not only by your references to our old friendship but 
by what you say with regard to whatever work I may still hope 
to do. I have planned to write something, not of so large a 
scope, and 1 am afraid not venturing to attempt such heights, as 
you have indicated, but still something of the kind to which 
your words pointed. I am much encouraged by your words 
and by those of my other friends to go on and to devote to the 
task whatever time and strength my small powers will permit. 

Let me say further that when I return home there will be 
nothing which I shall prize more highly than the opportunity to 
help to make known to the English people the true feelings of 

(250) 



No. 3] REPLY OF JAMES BRYCE g 

the American people. I shall assure them, as I know I confi- 
dently can, of the friendship of this country and of the strong 
desire which exists — and which is the desire of my own people 
as well — that the United States and Great Britain should walk 
hand in hand and should together hold aloft that torch of lib- 
erty that our common ancestors lighted so many centuries ago. 

I may say that since I have been here I have come to realize 
more and more what is the pacific and honorable attitude of 
your people. I am more than ever convinced that the cause 
of arbitration and world peace will prosper pretty much in 
proportion as it has the loyal adherence of the United States 
government and people. 

May I say further, as it has been my privilege in time past in 
England — and here I speak for my wife as well as for myself — 
as it has been our joy and delight frequently to see our Ameri- 
can friends when they come over and to do what we could to 
help them, so it will be a continual privilege to us to meet you 
and your friends and to do what we can for you, whether by 
putting you in touch with our people or by supplying informa- 
tion to your Academy with regard to what is going on in 
Britain. 

It is a great privilege to be able to feel oneself, if not tech- 
nically at least practically, a citizen of two such countries. You 
have made me a citizen of your country and I shall never forget 
that privilege. Whatever I can do to aid you and yours, that I 
shall do in unforgetting remembrance of your kindness. 

(251) 



PROCEEDINGS 

OF THE 

ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 



IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK 



Volume III] JULY, 1913 [Number 4 

THE CAGED MAN 



PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY 
THE ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 

Columbia University 
1 1 6th Street and Broadway, New York 



Entered as tectmd^last matter Nov. sz, iqio, at the post office at New York, N. Y. 
under the Act of Congress, July lb, 18Q4. 

COPYKIGHT, igi3, BY THE ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 



PROCEEDINGS 
OF THE ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 

The Proceedings are issued by the Academy as a record 
of its activities and as a means of giving detailed treatment to 
special subjects of importance. Each volume consists of four 
numbers, published in January, April, July and October. The 
January and July numbers give in full the papers read and a 
report of the discussions at the meetings of the Academy and the 
addresses at the dinner meetings. 

The numbers thus far issued are as follows: 

Vol, I, No. I. The Economic Position of Women 

October, 1910. Pp. 190 

No. 2. The Reform of the Currency 

January, 1911. Pp. 3CX) 

No. 3. The Year Book of the Academy 

April, 191 1. Pp. 27 

No. 4. The Reform of the Criminal Law and Procedure 

July, 191 1. Pp. 208 

Vol. II, No. I. Capital and Labor Unified 

October, 1911. Pp. 50 

No. 2. Business and the Public Welfare 

January, 19 1 2. Pp. 185 

No. 3. National Housing Association 

April, 1912. Pp. 236 

No. 4. Organization for Social Work 

July, 191 2. Pp. 236 

Vol. Ill, No. I. The Year Book of the Academy 

October, 191 2. Pp. 48 

No. 2. Efficient Government 

January, 19 1 3. Pp. 194 
April, 1913. Pp. 16 



No. 3. The Bryce Meeting 
No. 4. The Caged Man 



July, 1913. Pp. 136 

Separate copies of numbers i, 2 and 4 of volume I, 
numbers 2 and 4 of volume II, and numbers 2 and 4 of volume III, 
may be obtained in paper cover at ^1.50. A limited number of 
copies are also available in cloth binding at $2 each. 

Volume II, number i, and volume III, number 3, may be 
obtained separately at 50 cents. 

Communications in reference to the Proceedings should 
be addressed to Henry Raymond Mussey, Editor of the 
Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Kent Hall, 
Columbia University. Subscriptions should be forwarded and 
all business communications addressed to the Secretary of the 
Academy of Political Science, Kent Hall, Columbia 
University. Members of the Academy receive the Proceedings 
without further payment. 



PROCEEDINGS 

OF THE 

ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 

IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK 



Volume III] JULY, 1913 [Number 4 



THE CAGED MAN 

A SUMMARY OF EXISTING LEGISLATION IN THE UNITED STATES 
ON THE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS 



E. STAGG WHITIN, Ph.D. 

Assistant in Social Legislation, Columbia University and Chairman 
Executive Cot^mittee, National Committee on Prison Labor 



Prepared on the Henry Bergh Foundation for the Promotion of Humane 
Education in Columbia University 



The Academy of Political Science 

Columbia University, New York 

1913 



COPYKIGHT By 

The Academy of Political Science 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

THE CAGED MAN 

a su mmary of existing legislation in the united states on the 
Treatment of Prisoners 

I 
what is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state — The ward of the state 



II 

why is he confined? 

To work off a fine and costs. To satisfy a sentence — Fixed or indetermin- 
ate. Awaiting capital punishment 5-16 

III 
how may he be punished? 

Cruel and unusual punishme\its — Punishment exceeding hard labor — Solitary 
confinement — Dungeons — Blood hounds — Shackles and chains — Reduc- 
tion of food — The gag, iron mask, etc. — Corporal punishment — Showering 
with cold water — Stocks — Crucifix, yoke, buck, etc. — Punishment injurious 
to mind or body — Greater or more severe punishment than prescribed by 
board . 17-23 

IV 

HOW MAY HE BE WORKED? 

Leased to individuals for work outside the institution — Leased to individuals 
for work inside the institution — The state may work him^State industries 
for state consumption — Farms for state consumption — Public works — State 
farms for community consumption — State factories for community con- 
sumption. Under specific limitations — Competition with free labor — 
Number of convicts in one industry — Use of machinery — Manufacture of 
goods manufactured by free factories — Branding of prison-made goods^ 
Manufacture of certain articles — Work injurious to health or dangerous to 
person of convict — Association with free laborers during work hours — 
Labor which can be carried on without expense to the county and is 
consistent with safe keeping of prisoners. Hours of labor 24-46 



iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE 
V 

HOW IS HE MAINTAINED? 

Bunking — Food — Clothing 47-5^ 

VI 

HOW IS HE CARED FOR? 

Health provisions — Religious provisions — Educational provisions — Moral 
education — Reduction of time for good conduct — Special indulgences for 
good conduct — Reporting of good conduct to Board — Merit marks — Grad- 
ing of prisoners — Wage reward. General education — Prison schools — 
Prison libraries — Industrial education 59-91 

VII 

WHO CAN SET HIM FREE? 

Parole — Pardon — The Governor — The Governor and Board of Pardons — 

Governor and Council — Governor and Senate — Legislature 92-100 

VIII 

WHAT SPECIFIC DISABILITIES ARE CAUSED BY A PRISON SENTENCE? 

Loss of citizenship — Change in marital relationship — Loss of power of procre- 
ation (vasectomy) — A criminal record — Use of dead body for scientific 
purposes 101-117 



INTRODUCTION 

THE laws of Continental United States, that is of the 
forty-eight states and the District of Columbia but 
excluding Alaska, Hawaii, Porto Rico and the 
Philippines, regulating the treatment of prisoners during con- 
finement, under the caption " The Caged Man ", have been 
gathered together and classified so as to bring vividly to the 
mind of the student the answer to the question " What means 
a prison sentence ". The collection of this material has been 
an arduous task because the statutes affecting prisoners are to 
be found under the most diverse headings and as parts of the 
law on many subjects. The constitutions, the latest revised 
statutes and the session laws down to January' 1st, 191 3, have 
been carefully read and classified. The segregation of this 
material taken from its context and the classification of many 
hundreds of references, under an arbitrary classification, has 
required a knowledge of the actual administration of the law 
in the several states, and the ascertaining, as far as possible, 
the probable meaning of the confused and varied expression 
of the thought contained in many poorly-drawn and ill- 
conceived statutes, hidden away in legislation often foreign 
to the actual subject under consideration and conflicting in 
many details with other statutes. The administrative charac- 
ter of this legislation has led to the interpretation of these 
conflicts by administrative boards and the changing personnel 
of the Attorney General's office, rather than by adjudication 
in courts of record. This study therefore must be considered 
in the light of these limitations and as having been presented 
more as an exhibit of the vagaries of legislative caprice, than 
as suggesting either the actual practice existing under the 
prison administrations in the several states, or as an ideal upon 
w^hich to model new and better legislation. It suggests the 
repeal of many worn-out, antiquated and unused statutes ; it 
makes possible the laying down of the principle that legislation 
should deal with broad principles and leave administrative 
detail to the duly constituted body which has been created for 
administration ; and it brings to light many isolated provis- 



2 INTRODUCTION 

ions which would be valuable in the working out of a more 
perfect and better conceived penal statute law than is now 
found on the statute books of any state. References are given 
in full in the hope that students of the subject will be able 
to use the material in their work of drafting legislation, and 
in the hope that through such working over there may come to 
light and to our attention those errors which must necessarily 
have crept in because of the inherent difficulty of compilation 
and the variation resulting from the use of personal judgment 
in classification. Such suggestions, which will be gratefully 
received, should be sent to Miss Julia Jaffray, Secretar\% Edu- 
cational Department, National Committee on Prison Labor, 
319 University Hall, Columbia University, New York City. 
Miss Jaffray has compiled the statutes to which reference is 
made in this monograph. 

E. Stagg Whitin. 
New York City, April, 1913. 

(254) 



THE CAGED MAN 

HUMANE treatment of prisoners finds expression not 
alone in the limitations placed upon keepers but in the 
development of those incentives for a better life which 
play upon the dormant emotions and depleted energies of 
prisoners and vitalize them into normal being. Cruelty lies 
equally in the failure to provide these opportunities for reform 
as in the over-development of prohibitory measures. The 
surgical instruments of a century ago seem both cruel and 
crude to those familiar with modern surgery. Many of the 
instruments of penal administration herein referred to will 
seem as archaic to those who view them from the standpoint 
of modern psychology and ask the pertinent question what a 
prison sentence means today to society as well as to the " caged 
man ". 

I. 

WHAT IS THE STATUS OF A PRISONER? 

The state has a property right in the labor of the prisoner. 
The Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United 
States provides that neither slavery nor involuntar}' servitude 
shall exist, yet by inference allows its continuance as punish- 
ment for crime, after due process of law. Similar provisions 
are found in the constitutions of most states.^ The absolute 
prohibition of slavery without exception in Maryland, Rhode 
Island and Vermont abrogates the status of penal servitude 
but continues, under police power, the penal system for the 
protection of the community and for the protection of the 
wayward individual, his status being analogous to that of the 
insane, defective and othervvise incompetent wards of the state. 

The Property of the State. The Ward of the State. 

" Neither slavery nor involuntary " Slavery shall not be permitted in 

servitude, unless for the punishment this state." 

of crime, shall ever be tolerated in Rhode Island, Const. 1842, Art. i, 

this state." Sec. 4. 

California, Const. 1879, Art. i, 
Sec. 18. 

1 American and English Encyclopedia of Law, 1898, vol. 22, p. 1302. 

(255) 



THE CAGED MAN 



The Property of the State in: 



Alabama 
Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Florida 

Georgia 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

North Carolina 

North Dakota 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Tennessee 

Utah 
Wisconsin 



Const. 
Const. 
Sec. 
Const. 
Sec. 
Const. 
Sec. 
Const. 
R., 
Const. 
Par. 
Const. 
Sec. 
Const. 
Sec. 
Const. 
R-, 
Const. 
R., 
Const. 
i8. 
Const 
R., 

Const. 
Sec. 
Const. 
Sec. 
Const. 
Sec. 
Const, 
Sec 
Const 
Sec 
Const 
Sec 
Const 
Sec 
Const 
Sec. 
Const. 
Sec. 
Const 
Sec 
Const 
Const 
Sec 



1901, Sec. 32. 

1874, Art. 2, I 

27. 

1879, Art. I, 

18. 

1876, Art. 2, 
26. 

1885, D. of 
Sec. 19. 

1877, Art. I, 
, 17. 

1851, Art. I, 

37- 

1857, Art. I, 

1859. B. of 
Sec. 6. 
, 1890, B. of 

Sec. 25. 
. 1850, Art. 

Sec. II. 

, 1857, B. of 

Art. I, Sec. 2. 
. 1890, Art. 3, 

. 15- 

. 1875, Art. 2, 

• 31- 

. 1889, Art. 3, 
28. 

1875, Art. r, 
2. 

1909, Art. I, 
2. 
. 1876. Art. I, 

33- 

1889, Art. I, 

17- 
:. i8qi. Art. i, 
6. 
1857, Art. I, 

35- 

1870. Art. I, 

33- 
. 1895, Sec. 21. 
1848, Art. I, 

(256) 



The Ward of the State in: 

Maryland Const. 1867, D. of 

R., Art. 24. 

Rhode Island Const. 1842, Art. i, 
Sec. 4. 

Vermont Const. i793. C. i, 

Sec. I. 



II. 

WHY IS HE CONFINED? 
Three classes of convicts ^ are found in our penal institutions : 

A. Prisoners working off fines and costs. 

B. Prisoners serving sentences, either fixed or indeterminate. 

C. Prisoners awaiting capital punishment. 

A. Prisoners working off fines and costs. 

Persons convicted of minor offences are often sentenced to 
pay fines, the cost of conviction being assessed along with the 
fine. Fines may be paid out of the convicted man's personal 
possessions or by a " next of friend " to whom he becomes a 
debtor under agreement to refund in kind or labor. Failure 
to pay the fine results in committment to penal servitude for 
such a time as it may take to pay off the full amount due at 
the rate established by statute. Credits toward the satisfaction 
or payment of fines and costs are allowed as follows : 

1. $100.00 per year during confitiement. 

Connecticut (State prison.) R. S. 1902, Sec. 

Every prisoner held in said prison 2914. 

for non-payment of a fine shall he al- 
lowed one hundred dollars a year for 
his labor, from the time when his im- 
prisonment for non-payment of said 
fine commenced, if, in the opinion of 
the warden and directors, he shall have 
been submissive to the officers of the 
prison during his confinement and con- 
ducted himself as a faithful prisoner. 

2. $3.00 for each day's confinement. 

Nebraska Whenever district court or probate R. S. 191 1, C. 49, 

judge shall have determined that a per- Sec. 2692. 

son, confined in jail for any criminal 
offence, has no estate with which to 
pay fine and costs, it shall be the duty 
of said judge to discharge such person 
from further imprisonment for such 
fine and costs. Discharge to operate 
as complete release from such fine and 

^ This study covers only convicted prisoners, hence persons awaiting trial or 
held as witnesses are not included though frequently found especially in local 
jails. 

(257) 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Texas 



Washington 



costs, provided nothing shall authorize 
any person to be discharged from 
prison before the expiration of the 
time for which he or she is sentenced 
to imprisonment, nor until convict shall 
have been imprisoned at least one daj- 
for every $3 of the amount adjudged 
against him. 

When a defendant is convicted of a R. S. 191 1, Crim. 
misdemeanor and his punishment is Stat , Title 9, 
assessed at a pecuniary fine, if he C. 4, Art. 878. 

makes oath in writing that he is un- 
able to pay the fine and costs, he may 
be hired out to manual labor, or be put 
to work in a manual labor work-house, 
or on a farm or public work of the 
count}'. If there be no such work- 
house, farm, etc., and the authorities 
fail to hire him out, he shall be im- 
prisoned in the county jail for a suf- 
ficient length of time to discharge the 
full amount of fine and costs, rating 
such punishment at three dollars for 
each day thereof. 

Any person ordered into custody R. S. 1910, Title 
until the fine and costs adjudged 3, C. 19, Sec. 
against him are paid, who within five 2206. 

days shall not pay or cause payment 
of same, shall be imprisoned in the 
county jail until the fine and costs 
are paid, or until he has been impris- 
oned in jail i day for every three dol- 
lars of such fine. 

3. $2.00 for each day's confinement. 

California A judgment that a defendant pay a Penal Code, 1909, 

fine may also direct that he be impris- Title 8, Sec. 
oned until the fine is satisfied, but the 
judgment shall specify the extent of 
the imprisonment, which shall not ex- 
ceed I day for every $2.00 of the fine, 
nor extend in any case beyond the 
term for which the defendant might 
be sentenced to imprisonment for the 
offence for which he has been con- 
victed. 

Idaho Whenever any person under convic- 

tion for anj'^ criminal offense is con- 
fined in any jail for non-payment of 
fine, the district Court, upon satis- 
factory evidence of such inability, may, 
in lieu thereof, confine such person in 
the county jail at the rate of $2.00 per 
day until the fine imposed is satisfied. 

Montana When judgment of fine and costs is 

entered against a defendant and it is 
ordered that he be committed until the 
same are paid, if at any time there- 
after defendant prove to court that he 
is unable to pay such fines, costs, or 
any part thereof, the Court or judge 
(258) 



1205. 



R. S. 1908, Sec. 
8545. 



R. S. 1907, Title 
9, C. I, Sec. 
9373- 



No. 4] 



WHY IS HE CONFINED 



Nevada 



Oregon 



may order the sheriff to release him 
upon his having been confined in jail 
I day for every $2.00 of such fine and 
costs, or any portion remaining un- 
paid ; but if he do not prove to satis- 
faction of court that he is unable to 
pay he shall not be released, unless the 
sheriff has made the same upon execu- 
tion out of his property. 

Whenever anj' person, under convic- 
tion for any criminal offense, shall be 
confined in jail for anj' inability to pay 
any fine, forfeiture or costs, or to pro- 
cure sureties, the district court, upon 
satisfactory evidence of such inability 
may, in lieu thereof, confine the person 
in the county jail at the rate of $2.00 
per day until the fine, forfeiture or 
costs so imposed shall have been satis- 
fied. 

A judgment that a defendant pay a 
fine must also direct that he be im- 
prisoned in the county jail until the 
fine be satisfied, specifying the extent 
of imprisonment, which cannot exceed 
I day for every $2.00 of fine. In case 
the entry of judgment shall omit to 
direct the imprisonment and the ex- 
tent thereof, the judgment to pay the 
fine shall operate to authorize and re- 
quire the imprisonment of the defend- 
ant until the fine is satisfied at the 
rate above mentioned. 

4. ^7.00 for each day's confinement. 
Indiana In case such defendant do not im- 

mediately pay or replevy such judg- 
ment and costs the justice shall com- 
mit him to jail there to remain one 
day for each dollar of such fine and 
costs. 

Whenever anj^ person shall be com- 
mitted to prison for non-payment of 
any fine or costs, such imprisonment 
shall be reckoned at the rate of $1.00 
per day in reduction of fine. 

A judgment that the defendant pay 
a fine may also direct that he be im- 
prisoned until the fine is satisfied, 
specifj'ing the extent of the imprison- 
ment, which cannot exceed one day for 
every $1.00 of the fine. 

5. 60 cents for each day's confinement. 
Ohio When a fine is the whole or part of 

a sentence, the court may order that 
the person sentenced remain impris- 
oned in jail until such fine and costs 
are paid, or he is legally discharged, 
provided that the person so impris- 
oned shall receive credit upon such 
fine and costs at the rate of 60 cents 
per day for each day's imprisonment. 

(259) 



New Mexico 



Utah 



R. S. 1912, Sec. 
76 II. 



R. S. 1910, Title 
18, C. II, Sec 
1577- 



R. S. 1908, Sec. 
1954- 



R. S. 1897, C. 9, 
Sec. 832. 



R. S 

9I' 
4919 



1907, Title 
C. 37, Sec. 



Laws 1910, H. B. 
146. 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Oklahoma 



Oregon 



6. SsVz cents jor each day's confinement. 
Vermont A person committed to the House 

of Correction for non-payment of fine 
may be discharged on paying the bal- 
ance of the fine, or fine and costs, 
after deducting 2i3>Y3 cents for each 
day he has been committed for such 
default. 

7 $2.00 for each day's labor. 
North Dakota For each day's labor performed by 

any convict under the provisions of 
this chapter, there shall be credited on 
any judgment for fine and costs against 
him the sum of $2.00. 

For every day's labor performed by 
any convict, under the provisions 
hereof, there shall be credited on any 
judgment for fine and costs against 
him the sum of $2.00. 

Whenever any person shall be con- 
victed of a criminal offense under any 
of the ordinances of a city or town, 
and shall be adjudged to pay a fine 
and costs and shall fail to pay the 
same, he shall be sentenced to labor 
one day for every $2.00 of such fine 
upon the streets or other public works 
of said city under such officer as com- 
mon council may provide ; common 
council may provide such fetters and 
manacles as may be necessary to secure 
the person of such criminal during 
his term of labor. 

For every day's labor performed by 
any convict under the provisions 
hereof, there shall be credited on any 
judgment for fine and costs against 
him the sum of $2.00. 

Any person sentenced to the watch- 
house or place of confinement of the 
village who is not physically disabled 
shall be compelled to perform labor 
upon any public work of said village, 
under such supervision and control as 
the village may provide, and for each 
day's labor performed the person so 
sentenced shall be credited with the 
sum of $2.00, which shall apply on such 
fine and costs until same are paid, or 
until such person is released from cus- 
tody. 

8. $1.^0 jor each day's labor. 
Illinois Any person convicted of petit lar- 

ceny or any misdemeanor punishable 
under the laws of this state, may be 
compelled by Court of Record to work 
out fine and costs, in the work-house 
of the city, town or county, or in the 
streets and alleys of any town or city 
(260) 



R. S. 1906, C. 
261, Sec. 6022. 



South Dakota 



Wisconsin 



R. S. 1905, Sec. 
10446. 



R. S. 1903, Sec. 
5728. 



R. S. 1910, Title 
26, C. 4, Sec 
3237- 



R. S. 1910, Sec. 
749- 



Acts 1907, C. 117. 



R. S. 1897, Title 
26. C. I, Sec. 
5657- 



No. 4] 



IF/IV IS HE CONFINED 



Iowa 



Minnesota 



Wyoming 



or on the public roads of the county, 
under the proper person in charge of 
such work-house at the rate of $1.50 
for each day's labor. 

For every day's labor performed by 
any convict under provisions of sees. 
5652-4, shall be credited on any judg- 
ment for fine and costs against him 
the sum of $1.50 and no person shall 
be entitled to the benefits of the law 
providing for the liberation of poor 
convicts, if, in the opinion of the sher- 
iff, the judgment may be satisfied by 
the labor of the person as herein au- 
thorized. 

For each day's labor the prisoner 
shall be credited $1.50 on any judg- 
ment for fine and costs, and, when im- 
prisoned in d fault of payment of a 
fine or fine and costs, he shall be dis- 
charged whenever he has performed 
sufficient labor to pay the same. The 
officer in charge of such prisoners shall 
protect them from insult and annoy- 
ance, while at labor or going to and re- 
turning therefrom. 

Whenever the defendant is sentenced 
to prison for the violation of a city or- 
dinance, he shall be put to work for the 
benefit of the city, under the discre- 
tion of the mayor, for the term of his 
imprisonment, and when committed for 
the non-payment of a fine or costs he 
shall be put to work for the benefit of 
the city, and shall be credited on such 
fine and costs $1.50 per day for each 
day he shall work. 



9. $1.00 for each day's labor. 



Arizona 



Colorado 



Connecticut 



Kansas 



Whenever any prisoner shall be sen- 
tenced to pay a fine and to be com- 
mitted until paid, shall be employed at 
hard labor, he shall be allowed the sum 
of $1.00 for each day's labor to be 
credited on such fine, and when he 
shall have earned the amount of such 
fine he shall be discharged. 

Whenever any prisoner sentenced to 
pay a fine and costs, shall be employed 
at hard labor, he shall be allowed the 
sum of $1.00 for each day's labor and 
when he shall have earned the amount 
of such fine and costs he shall be dis- 
charged. 

County convicts committed for crim- 
inal offense and held for fine and costs 
are credited $1.00 for each day's labor. 
Convicts may not be held more than 
4 months. 

Prisoners shall be allowed $1.00 for 
each day's work performed by them 
in good faith or if prisoners prefer the 
(261) 



R. S. 1897, Title 
26, C. I, Sec. 
5657- 



R. S. 1905, C. 
106, Sec. 5471. 



R. S. 1910, C. 
121, Sec. 1768. 



R. S. 1909, Title 
15, Sec. 1201. 



R. S. 1908, C. 35. 
Sec. 2024. 



R. S. 1902, C. 
177, Sec. 2942. 



R. S. 1909. C. 97> 
Art. 18, Sec 
6942. 



10 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Board of County Commissioners mav 
allow each prisoner a specified sum 
per cubic- yard for breaking stone. 
When the same, either by the day or 
the cu. yd. shall amount to the sum of 
the fine and costs, the same shall be 
deemed a full satisfaction. 

Kentucky When punishment for a crime is a 

fine or imprisonment in the county jail 
or both, the jury may in their discre- 
tion, if the defendant is a male, pro- 
vide in their verdict that the defendant 
shall work at hard labor until fine 
and costs are satisfied. The defendant 
shall not be required to labor more 
than 8 hours a day, and may at any 
time pay the costs, or whateyer part 
thereof remains unpaid, after receiving 
credit of $i.oo for each day worked in 
payment thereof. 

LouiSlAN.\ In all criminal prosecutions where a 

person is convicted in any of the courts 
of the state of any crime punishable 
under the law with imprisonment at 
hard labor, but not necessarily so, the 
judge before whom such conviction is 
had may sentence person so convicted 
to work on the public roads or streets 
of parish or city in which crime was 
committed, and which may eventually 
be chargeable with costs of prosecu- 
tion, for a term not exceeding term 
now specified ; when a fine in said 
cases is imposed as part of the penalty, 
in default of liquidation thereof, the 
judge may sentence to hard labor at 
the rate of $i.00 per day. 

Missouri If the punishment be by fine and the 

iine be not paid, for every dollar of 
such fine the prisoner shall work one 
day and shall also work for such per- 
iod of time as he would otherwise be 
required to remain in jail in order to 
be released from the payment of any 
costs, in such case. 

Rhode Island Fines can be worked off at fifty cents 

a day for first thirty days; and $i.oo 
for ensuing days. 

West Virginia Any male prisoner imprisoned for 

failure to pay fine and costs may be 
ordered by the county court to work 
on the county roads, or on the streets 
or alleys of an incorporated city, under 
the direction of such officer as court 
may direct, at the rate of $i.oo per day 
until fine and costs are paid. 

Wyoming In cases of vagrancy or petit larceny 

and in other cases in which a justice 
has jurisdiction to hear and determine, 
when the party charsjed is found guilty, 
it shall be lawful for the justice to 
(262) 



R. S. 1909, C. 36, 

Sees. 1377-80. 



Acts of 1878, No. 
38, Sec. I. 



R. S. 1909, Sec. 
3733- 



Laws 191 1, C. 
669. 

R. S. 1906. C. 36, 
Sec. II 68. 



R. S. 1910, C. 
399, Sec. 61 1 1. 



No. 4] IVHV IS HE CONFINED 1 1 

sentence such person to imprisonment 
at hard labor or to fine him or both ; 
and in default of paj'ment of fine, the 
sheriff shall set him to work on any 
public improvements which he may- 
deem proper. The rate of compensa- 
tion to be allowed by the county for 
such prisoners shall be $1.00 a day for 
services rendered in payment of fines 
imposed and costs incurred, when not 
paid in cash. 

10. ^'5 cents for each day's labor. 

Alabama The court may impose hard labor R. S. 1907. Art. 

for the county for such period, not to 5, Sec. 7635. 

exceed 10 mos., as may be sufficient to 

paj' the costs, at the rate of 75 cents 

per day, and the court must determine 

the time required to work out the costs 

at this rate. 
Arkansas Each person worked, as provided in R. S. 1904, Sec. 

the preceding section, shall be credited 7353- 

with the sum of 75 cents on the fine 

and costs adjudged against him for 

every full day's labor so performed by 

him when he is kept and fed by the 

overseer and shall be credited with the 

sum of $1.00 for each dav's labor when 

he boards himself. 

11. 40 cents for each day's labor. 

Tennessee Each person confined in the work- R. S. 1896, Title 

house for a failure to pay fine and 7, Art. 5, Sees, 

costs, shall be credited at the rate of 7417-21. 

40 cents for each day of actual work 
done and no prisoner shall be dis- 
charged upon the act of insolvency, nor 
before said fine and costs or costs only 
have been worked out, fully paid or se- 
cured, unless by order of the Board of 
Commissioners. 

12. JO cents for each day's labor. 

Florida No such convict shall be required to R. S. 1906, Title 

work more than 10 hours in each 24, 4, C. 2, Sec. 
and every such convict shall be en- 41 13. 
titled to receive, together with subsist- 
ence, a credit at the rate of 30 cents 
per diem on account of fines and costs 
adjudged against him. 

13- 25 cents for each day's labor. 
Virginia Any person held to labor, under the R. S. 1904. Title 

provisions of this chapter, for non- 53, C. 191, Sec. 

payment of any fine imposed upon 3936. 

him, shall be required to work out the 
full amount thereof, including the legal 
costs, at the rate of 25 cents per day, 
for each day so held, Sundays ex- 
cepted, and shall be entitled to a credit 
of 25 cents for each day of his con- 
finement, whether he labors or not. No 
(^63) 



12 THE CAGED MAN [Vol. Ill 

person shall be held to labor in any 
chain gang for the non-payment of any 
fine imposed upon him for a longer 
period than 6 months. 

14. Added allowance for efficient labor. 

Mississippi Any convict working under the di- R. S. 1906, C. 22, 

rection of the Board of Supervisors, Sec. 842. 

who renders efficient services and com- 
plies with all necessary rules and regu- 
lations, may have deducted from his 
fine and the term of his imprisonment 
one-fourth thereof. 

15. Journeyman's i^age jar like labor. 

Connecticut Prisoners held for costs only al- R. S. 1902, C. 

lowed the wages of journeymen for like 176, Sec. 2913. 

labor. If in judgment of directors 
convict is unable to pay costs and has 
conducted himself well during his con- 
finement warden may remit them. 

16. Amount obtained for prisoner's labor. 

Michigan Convicts committed in default of R. S. 1897, C. 86, 

payment of fines shall be allowed the Sec. 12. 

amount obtained for their labor, less 

the cost of their support. When 

amount of fine is completed they shall 

be discharged. 
New Hampshire Convicts committed in default of pay- R. S. 1901, C. 

ment of fines shall be allowed the 282, Sec. 15. 

amount obtained for their labor, less 

the cost of their support. 
New Jersey When judgment is given in any of R. S. 19 10, Page 

the courts of the state for fine or im- 1874, Sec. 162. 

prisonment, with or without costs, it 

shall be lawful to place the defendant 

against whom such judgment shall be 

rendered at labor in any county jail or 

penitentiary, until fine and costs are 

paid by the proceeds of such labor. 
North C.'VROI.ina The Board of Commissioners of the Laws of 1908, C. 

several counties may hire out persons 24, Sec. 4. 

imprisoned in jails who fail to pay all 

the costs they are adjudged to pay, 

provided the amount realized from hir- 
ing out such persons shall be credited 

to them on the fine and bill of costs in 

all cases of conviction. 

B. Prisoners serving sentences, either fixed or indeterminate. 

The prisoner convicted of crime is sentenced for a fixed or 
indeterminate period to penal servitude. This period may be 
determined by statute, by the judge at. the time of conviction, 
limited by the statutor\^ designations as maximum and 
minimum penalty, or it may be indeterminate in that the 
maximum is designated but the actual time can be affected by 

(264) 



No. 4] 



JFHV IS HE CONFINED 



13 



the conduct of the prisoner judged by a duly constituted board 
of judgment. Term or fixed sentences are still found for some 
crimes in every state. There are no indeterminate sentences 
prescribed by law as yet in Alabama, Arkansas, California, 
Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, 
Maine, IMar^'land, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, 
North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, 
Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, 
West Virginia, Wisconsin. 



Arizona 



Colorado 



Connecticut 



Idaho 



Indiana 



Illinois 



Iowa 



Kansas 



Sentences are Indeterminate in: 

For convicts over 18 years of age, 
for any crime, except treason and first 
degree murder, the maximum and 
minimum sentence to be that pre- 
scribed by law for the crime. 

For any person sentenced to prison 
for other than life term, the minimum 
sentence not to be less nor the maxi- 
mum more than prescribed by law for 
the crime. 

For all persons except tramps or 
those with a life sentence, committed 
to prison or reformatory. The maxi- 
mum not greater than specified by law ; 
the minimum not less than one year. 

For all persons except those con- 
victed of treason or murder of the 
first degree. Maximum shall not ex- 
ceed the longest term fixed by law ; 
the minimum shall not exceed the mini- 
mum fixed by statute, and no minimum 
to be less than 6 mos. and where the 
sentence may be for life or a number 
of years, the court shall fix maximum. 

For any male persons thirty or over, 
convicted, except of treason, first and 
second degree murder. Minimum and 
maximum sentences to be those pro- 
vided by law. 

For every male person over 21 and 
every female over 18 convicted of fel- 
on}-, except treason, murder, rape and 
kidnaping. The maximum shall not 
exceed maximum provided by law ; the 
minimum not less than one year, mak- 
ing allowance for good time as pro- 
vided by law. 

For any person over 16, convicted of 
felony, except treason or murder. 
Maximum not more than provided by 
law ; no minimum set forth. 

For all persons except those con- 
victed of murder or treason. Mini- 
mum and maximum sentences those 
prescribed by law. subject to control 
of trial iudge. 

(26s) 



Laws 1912, C. 46. 



R. S. 1908, C. 35. 
Sees. 2037-8. 



R. S. 1902, Title 
7, C. 97, Sees. 
1535-7- 



R S. 1909. H. B. 
No. 214. 



R. S. 1908, Sec. 
2152. 



R. S. 1909, C. 38, 
Sec. 498. 



R. S. 1907, Title 
26, C. 2, Sec. 
5718, a 13. 

R. S. iao9. C. 97, 
Sec. 6837. 



14 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Ken'TUCKY For persons convicted of felony ; 

maximum and minimum sentences pro- 
vided by law. 

Massachusetts For any convict sentenced to state 

prison except for life or as an habitual 
criminal. Minimum sentence not less 
than two and one-half years. Maxi- 
mum not more than prescribed by law. 
Additional sentence begins at expira- 
tion of first minimum. 

MiCHIG.'VN For all convicts except life. 

When convict has served 25 years of 
life sentence less the commutation 
which would have been allowed if his 
sentence had been for 25 years, Gov- 
ernor has power to parole him. 

Minimum sentence not less than 6 
months. Maximum not more than pro- 
vided by law. Judge can recommend 
proper maximum. 

Minnesota For all convicts except those con- 

victed of treason or murder. Life pris- 
oners not to be paroled until Xhty have 
served 35 years less diminution for 
good conduct which would have been 
allowed if sentence had been 35 years. 
Maximum shall not exceed maximum 
provided by law ; minimum not stated. 

Nebraska For all convicts over 18 convicted 

of penitentiary oifence, except murder, 
treason, rape, kidnaping or having 
served two previous terms. The maxi- 
mum and minimum sentences to be pro- 
vided by law. 

New Hampshire For any convict sentenced to state 
prison except for life or as an habitual 
criminal. Maximum and minimum 
sentences to be those provided by law 
for his offense. 

New Jersey For all convicts sent to state prison 

except first degree murder. Maximum 
sentence as provided by law ; minimum 
not less than one year, and not more 
than one-half of maximum. Where 
death sentence has been commuted 
minimum must be twenty-five years. 

New Mexico For all prisoners sent to the peni- 

tentiary. Court to fix minimum and 
maximum sentences. 

New York For all first offenders convicted of 

felonies other than murder of first or 
second degree. Minimum sentence not 
less than i year or not more than Yi 
longest period fixed by law for crime. 
Maximum the longest period fixed by 
law. 

North Dakota For any person convicted of felony 

except treason, murder of ist degree, 

rape and kidnapping. Maximum and 

minimum sentences as provided by law. 

(266) 



Laws 19 10, C. 4. 



Laws 191 1, C. 
451- 



Laws IQ05, C. 184. 
Acts 1911, No. 
237- 



Laws 1905, C. 
184. 



Laws 191 1, C. 



Laws 191 1, C. 
184. 



Laws 1909, C. 
120. 



Laws 1911, C. 
191. 



Laws 1909. C. 32. 



5irdseye's Con- 
solidated Laws, 
1909, Art. 196, 
Sec. 2189. 



R. S. 1909, C. 175. 



No. 4] IVHV IS HE CONFINED 



15 



Ohio Compulsory for all prisoners sent to R. S. 19 10, Sec. 

state reformatory. 2132. 

Optional for prisoners sent to state R. S. 1910, Sec. 

penitentiary. 2160. 

Maximum and minimum sentences R. S. 1910, Sees. 

are optional with judge but minimum 2141-4 & Sees. 

cannot be less than prescribed by law 2167-75. 

for offense committed, nor maximum 

greater than prescribed by law. 
Pexxsylvaxia For any person sentenced to the peni- R. S. 1909, pp. 

tentiary. Maximum and minimum 5329-31, Sec. 6. 

sentences to be determined by judge 

but maximum cannot be more than 

prescribed by law nor minimum more 

than one-fourth of maximum. 
South Dakota For all first offenders over 16, sub- Laws 191 1, C. 

ject to a penitentiary sentence, except 169. 

for treason or murder, or convicts with 

abnormal tendencies. Maximum and 

minimum sentences to be prescribed by 

law. 
Wyoming For all convicts sentenced to the R. S. 1910, C. 42, 

penitentiary otherwise than for life. Sees. 530-531. 

The maximum sentence to be no longer 

than prescribed by law and the mini- 
mum not less than minimum pre- 
scribed. Both to be regulated by judge. 

C. Prisoners azvaiting capital punishment 

Pending the execution of the death penalty, prisoners so 
sentenced are confined in a penal institution. Capital punish- 
ment has been abolished in Kansas (R. S. 1909, sec. 2496), 
Maine (R. S. 1903, C. 119, sec. i), Minnesota (laws, 191 1, 
H. F. No. 2), Michigan (R. S. 1897, sec. 11470), Rhode 
Island (R. S. 1909, C. 343, sees, i and 2) except for life 
prisoners who commit murder, Wisconsin (R. S. 1889, C. 181, 
sec. 4338). Pro\-isions determining confinement for prisoners 
awaiting execution and the manner of their execution are 
found in the following states : 

Alabama R. S. 1907, C. 165, Sec. 6310. 

R. S. 1907, C. 278, Sec. 7639. 

Arizoxa R. S. igoi. Title 8, C. i. Sec. 174. 

Arkansas R. S. 1904, C. 49, Sec. 2441. 

California Penal Code, 1909, Title 8, C. 2, Sec. 1217. 

Colorado R. S. 1908, C. 35, Sec. 2028. 

Connecticut R. S. 1902, C. 82, Sec. 1141. 

Delaware R. S. 1893, C. 32, Sec. 11. 

District of Columbia R. S. 1911, C. 19, Sec. 801. 

Florida R. S. 1906. Div. 5, Title 2, C. 2, Sec. 3205. 

Georgia R. S. 191 i. Sec. 1069. 

Idaho R. S. 1908, P. 2, Title 8, Sec. 8020. 

Indiana R. S. 1908, Sec. 2196. 

Illinois R. S. igoq. Page 827, Sec. 439. 

(267) 



i6 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Iowa 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maryland 

Massachusetts 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New Hampshire 

New Jersey 

New Mexico 

New York 

North Carolina 

North Dakota 

Ohio 

Oklahoma 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 

South Carolina 

South Dakota 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 

Vermont 

Virginia 

Washington 

West Virginia 

Wyoming 



R. S. 

R. S. 

R. S. 

R. S. 

R. S. 

R. S. 

R. S. 



Penal 
R. S. 
R. S. 
R. S. 
R. S. 
R. S. 
R. S. 
R. S. 
R. S. 
R. S. 



R. S. 

R. S. 

R. S. 

R. S. 

R. S. 



897, Sec. 4728. 

909, C. 36, Sec. 1 149. 

904, Sec. 975. 

904, Art. 27, Sec. 335. 

902, C. 207, Sec. 2. 

908, C. 29, Sec. 1512. 

909, Sec. 4450. 

907, P. I, Title 8, C. I, Sec. 8293. 

911, P. I, C. I, Sees. 2050-2052. 

912, Sec. 6386. 

901, C. 255, Sec. 6. 

910, Page 1781, Sec. 108. 
897, C. 2, Sec. 1066. 

Law, 1909, C. 4, Sec. 1044. 

908, C. 8x, Sec. 3631. 

905, C. 18, Sec. 8799. 

910, Part 4, Title i, C. 3, Sec. 12400. 

903, C. 25, Art. 17, Sec. 2174. 
910, Title 19, C. 2, Sec. 1903. 

903, Page 3486, Sec. 9. 

902, Criminal Code, C. 10, Sec. 136. 
910, C. 17, Sec. 253. 

896, P. 4, C. 2, Sec. 6442. 
89s, Title 9, C. 4, Sec. 861. 
907, C. 14, Sec. 4162. 

906, Title 12, C. 114, Sec. 2366. 

904, Title 52, C. 180, Sec. 3663. 
910, Title 14, C. 5, Sec. 2392. 
906, C. 152, Sec. 4454. 

910, C. 385, Sec. 5789. 
(268) 



Ill 

HOW MAY HE BE PUNISHED? 



Punishment prescribed by the court, should it exceed the 
statutory provision/ or the common acceptation of just 
penalty,' may be declared void and the servitude terminated.^ 

Cruel and Unusual Punishments are Prohibited in: 

Alabama R. S. 1907, Sec. 6543. 

Arizona Const. 1910, Art. 2, Sec. 15. 

Arkansas Const. 1874, Art. 2, Sec. 9. 

Colorado Const. 1876, Art. 2, Sec. 20. 

Florida Const. 1885, D. of R., Sec. 8. 

R. S. 1906, Art. 6, Sec. 4139. 

Georgia Const. 1877, Art. i, Par. 9. 

Idaho Const. 1889, Art. i, Sec. 6. 

Illinois R. S. 1909, C. 108, Sec. 37. 

Indiana Const. 1851, Art. i, Sec. 16. 

R. S. 1908, C. 124, Sec. 9864. 

Iowa Const. 1857, Art. i, Sec. 17. 

Kansas Const. 1859, B. of R., Sec. 9. 

R. S. 1909, C. 108, Sec. 8583. 

Kentucky Const. 1890, B. of R., Sec. 17. 

Rev. 1909, C. 97, Sec. 3797. 

Louisiana Const. 1898, Art. 12. 

M.A.INE Const. 1819, Art. i, Sec. 9. 

Maryland Const. 1867, D. of R., Art. 25. 

Massachusetts Const. 1780, P. i, Art. 26. 

Michigan Const. 1850, Art. 6, Sec. 31. 

Minnesota Const. 1857, Art. i, Sec. 5. 

Mississippi Const. 1890, Art. 3, Sec. 28. 

Missouri Const. 1875, Art. 2, Sec. 25. 

Montana Const. 1889, Art. 3, Sec. 20. 

Nebraska Const. 1875, Art. i, Sec. 9. 

Nevada Const. 19 10, Art. i, Sec. ^ 

R. S. 1912, Art. 8, Sec. 178. 

New Mexico Const. 1910, Art. 2, Sec. 13. 

New Jersey Const. 1897, Art. i, Sec. 15. 

New York Const. 1894, Art. i, Sec. 5. 

North Carolina Const. 1876, Art. i, Sec. 14. 

North Dakota Const. 1889, Art. i, Sec. 6. 

Ohio Const. 1851, Art. i, Sec. 9. 

Oklahoma Const. 1907, Art. 2, Sec. 9. 

Oregon Const. 1857, Art. i, Sec. 16. 

Pennsylvania Const. 1873, Art. i, Sec. 13. 

Rhode Island Const. 1842, Art. i, Sec. 8. 

South Carolina Const. 1895, Art. i. Sec. 19. 

South Dakota Const. 1889, Art. 6, Sec. 23. 

Tennessee Const. 1870, Art. i, Sec. 16. 

1 Robinson v. Miner, 68 Mich.. 549. 

- State V. Driver, 78 N. Car., 423. State v. Miller, 75 N. Car., 73. 
3 Amer. and English Ency. of Law, 2d edit., vol Vlll, pp. 436-440. 

(269) 



i8 

Texas 

Utah 

Virginia 

Washington 

West Virginia 

w'isconsin 

Wyoming 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Const. 1876, B. of R., Sec. 13. 
Const. 1896, Art. i, Sec. 9. 
Const. 1902, Art. i, Sec. 9. 
Const. 1889, Art. i, Sec. 14. 
Const. 1872, Art 3, Sec. 5. 
Const. 1848, Art. i, Sec. 6. 
R. S. 1898, Sec. 4923. 
Const. 1889, Art. i, Sec. 14. 



The sentence of the court whether expressly provided or 
not is understood to be a sentence to hard labor. 

Punishment Exceeding Hard Labor is Prohibited in: 

Tennessee Workhouse prisoners. R. S. 1896, Title 

7, Art. 4, Sec. 
7391- 

Punishment other than hard labor is often permitted, de- 
fined and prescribed b\' law. Indeed, hard labor, under rea- 
sonable restrictions as required in most prisons, is healthful 
for mind and body and, in the judgment of prisoners is a 
veritable boon, compared with enforced idleness. For dis- 
ciplinan,' purposes, therefore, other forms of punishment have 
been instituted by prison authorities and oftentimes are of a 
character that amounts to torture. Hence, it has become neces- 
sarv^ to define by statute the parts of such punishment as may 
amount to torture and to define definitely those that are per- 
mitted and those that are prohibited. The following special 
forms of punishment are regulated in the several states as 
follows : 



Delaware 
Idaho 
Indiana 
Iowa 

Kansas 

Louisiana 
Maine 
Maryland 
Massachusetts 



Solitary Confinement is permitted in: 
Bread and water diet. 

Bread and water diet. 

Bread and water diet. 



Deprivation of light and limitation 
of food so as to produce distress but 
not hazard the life of the convict. 



Bread and water diet. 

10 daj's on bread and water. 

Solitary labor ; bread and water diet 
unless physician directs otherwise. 

(270) 



R. S. 1893, C. 

133. Sec. 5. 
R. S. 1098, Sec. 

8502. 
R. S. 1908, C. 

124, Sec. 10036. 
R. S. 1907, Title 

26, C. 2, Sec. 
5675. 

R. S. 1909, C. 

108, Art. 30, 

Sec. 8583. 
R. S. 1904, Sec. 

2864. 
R. S. 1903, C. 

141, Sec. 39. 
R. S. 1904, Art. 

27. Sec. 640. 
R. S. 1902, C. 

225, Sees. 34 & 
35- 



No. 4] 

Michigan 

New Hampshire 

Oklahoma 
Pennsylvania 

South Carolina 

Tennessee 

Utah 

Wisconsin 

New Mexico 

New Jersey 

New York 
Oregon 

South Dakota 

Virginia 

South Carolina 
Virginia 



HOW MAY BE BE PUNISHED 



Life prisoners who assault prison 
officials or attempt escape may be sen- 
tenced to six months. 

Other prisoners for 30 days. 

Not more than 3 days ; bread and 
water diet unless other food is necessary 
for preserving health of convict. 

Confinement may be at hard labor. 



Bread and water diet ; not more 
than 30 days for one offense. 



Bread and water diet. 



2. Dungeons are permiited in: 

Jail prisoners may be confined i 
week on bread and water. 

Solitary confinement on bread and 
water diet with chain on leg or hand- 
cuffs or both for six days. 

Short allowance prescribed by phy- 
sician. 

Everj^ jail to have one cell or dun- 
geon for confinement of criminals sen- 
tenced to solitary confinement. 

On bread and water diet. Not more 
than three days for one offense. 



3. Blood Hounds are permitted in: 

To be kept for the purpose of track- 
ing fugitive convicts. 

To be maintained at the expense of 
the county. 



19 

R. S. 1897, C. 

75, Sec. 37- 
R. S. 1901, C. 

285, Sec. 12. 

R. S. 1901, C. 

285, Sec. 15. 
R. S. 1903, Sec. 

5731- 

R. S. 1907, Page 

2010, Sec. I, 

Page 3486, Sec. 

II. 
R. S. 1902, Title 

2, C. 3,i, Sec. 

661. 
R. S. 1896, Sees. 

7537-8. 
R. S. 1907, Sec. 

2262. 
R. S. 1898, Title 

34, C. 201, Sec. 

4917. 



R. S. 1897, Title 
7, C. 9, Sec. 
830. 

R. S. 1910, Page 
4913- 

R. S. 1909, C. 47, 
Art. 6, Sec. 154. 

R. S. 1910, C. 14, 
Sec. 4525. 

R. S. 1910, Title 
12, Sees. 673 & 
752. 

R. S. 1904, Sec. 
4143- 



R. S. 1902, Title 
2, C. 32, Sec. 

659- 
Acts of 1910, C. 
213. 



4. Shackles and Chains : 



(A) Permitted in; 
Alabama Only with con - 

sent of inspec- 
tors. 

Connecticut 



(B) Prohibited in: 



R. S. 
1907, 
Sec. 

6545- 
R. S. 
1902, 

Sec. 
2900. 



Louisiana 



R. S. 
1904, 
Page 

1315* 
Sec. 2. 



(271) 



20 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 





'A) Permitted in: 




(B) Prohibited in: 


Colorado 


Convicts at 


R. S. 


I New Jersey Shackled con- Acts of 




work on streets, 


1908, 


victs may not be 191 1, 




quarries, or in 


Sec. 


marched through C. 372. 




mines. 


2023. 


the streets of any 


Florida 


Municipal con- 


R. S. 


community, nor 




victs who have 


1906, 


employed under 




escaped and been 


Art. 2, 


guard upon pub- 




recaptured. 


Sec. 


lic improvements 






4114. 


where free labor 


Georgia 


Chain gang 


R. S. 


is employed. 




permitted. 


1911. 
Sec. 697. 




Idaho 


Ball and chain 


R. S. 






attached to one 


1908, 






leg. 


Sec. 
8502. 




Kansas 


Ball and chain 


R. S. 






so used as not to 


1909, 






torture limbs. 


C. 108, 
Art. 30, 

Sec. 

8583. 




Massachu- 


Log and chain 


R. S. 




setts 


for county pris- 


1902, 






oners. 


C. 225, 
Sec. 37. 




New Jersey 


Chain on leg 


R. S. 






or handcuffs, or 


1910, 






both, permitted 


Page 






on prisoners in 


4913- 






solitary' confine- 








ment. 






Oklahoma 




R. S. 

1903, 
Sec. 

5731- 




Pennsyl- 


Keepers of 


R. S. 




vania 


county jails may 


1907, 






put iron yokes 


Page 






round prisoner's 


201 1, 






neck, chains on 


Sec. I, 






leg, or otherwise 








restrain in irons. 






South 


Chain gangs 


R. S. 




Carolina 


permitted, for 


1902, 






convicts with 


Sec. 






sentence under 


772-3- 






five years. 






South 


Ball and chain 


R. S. 




Dakota 


for county con- 


1910, 






victs. 


Title 12, 
Sec. 




■WASHINGTO^ 


Ball and chain 


745- 
R. S. 






for county con- 


1910. 






victs. 


Sec. 
8493- 




West 


Ball and chain 


R. S. 




Virginia 


for county con- 


1906. 






victs. 


C. 36. 

Sec. 
I168. 





(272) 



No. 4] 



HOW MAY HE BE PUNISHED 



21 







5 , Reductii 


3« of Food. 








(A) Permitted in: 






(B) Prohibited in: 




Tennessee 


Jail prisoners 


Laws 


Florida 


Labor without 


R. S. 




refusing to work 


1899, 




food. 


1906, 




to have only one 


c. 358. 






Art. 6, 




meal a day until 








Sec. 




they do good 








4139- 




work. 




Montana 


Rations may 


R. S. 


Virginia 


With the con- 


R. S. 




not be reduced 


1907, 




sent of the Gov- 


1904, 




without reducing 


Sec. 




ernor misdeme- 


Sec. 




the amount of 


9736. 




anornot amount- 


4143- 




labor required. 






ing to felony may 




Nevada 


Rations may 


R. S. 




be punished with 




1 


not be reduced 


1912, 




lower and coarser 






unless hours of 


Sec. 




diet. 






labor are re- 
duced. 


1S19- 




6. 


The Gag, Iron Mask, etc. 






(A) Permitted in: 






(B) Prohibited in : 




Virginia 




R. S. 


Connecticut Fine of $50.00 


R. S. 






1904, 




for officer using 


1902, 






Sec. 




gag. 


Sec. 






4143- 






2924. 








Massachu 


Fine of $50.00 


R. S. 








setts 


for officer using 
gag- 


1902, 
C. 225, 
Sec. 33. 






7. Corporal 


Punishment 








(A) Permitted in: 






(B) Prohibited in: 




Alabama 


Administered 


R. S. 


Georgia 




Const. 




only by party au- 


1907, 






1877. 




thorized by Pres- 


Sec. 






Art. I, 




ident of Board 


6543- 






Par. 7. 




of Inspectors. 




Illinois 




R. S. 


Connecticut Moderate 


R. S. 






1909, 




whipping, not 


1902, 






C. 108, 




exceeding lo 


Sec. 






Sec. 37. 




stripes for one 


2900. 


Kansas 




R. S. 




offense. 








1909, 


Delaware 


In extreme 


R. S. 






C. 108, 




cases overseer 


1893, 






Art. 30, 




with consent of 


C. 54, 






Sec. 




one commission- 


Sec. 10. 






8583. 




er may inflict 




Maine 




R. S. 




moderate whip- 








1903, 




ping. 








C. 141, 




Whipping may 


Laws of 






Sec. 10. 




only be inflicted 


1905, 


Michigan 


Whipping with 


R. S. 




by agents of the 


C. 125. 




lash on bare 


1897, 




board . 






body. 


C. 75, 


Georgia 


Whipping Boss 


R. S. 






Sec. 40. 




to be appointed 


1911, 


Montana 




R. S. 




b y County or 


Title 7, 






1907, 




m u n i c ipal au- 


Sec. 858. 






Sec. 




thorities, which 








9736. 




fix his compen- 




Nevada 




R. S. 




sation and pre- 








1912^ 




scribe his duties. 








Sec. 
7S9Q. 



(273) 



22 



THE CAGED MAN 





(A) Permitted in : 




(B) Prohibited in: 




Indiana 


Only by order 


R. S. 


New Mexico 


R. S. 




of Warden in 


1908, 




1897, 




presence of pris- 


C. 124, 




Sec. 




on physician and 


Sec. 




1056. 




moral instructors 


9867. 


New Jersey 


R. S. 




of prison. Not 






1910, 




until 12 hours 






Page 




after offense and 






4913. 




only between 






Art. 7. 




the hours of 8 




New York Blows. 


R. S. 




and lo a. m. 






1909, 


Kentucky 


In presence of 


R. S. 




C. 47, 




Warden. Not 


1909, 




Art. 6, 




until 12 hours 


C. 97, 




Sec. 153. 




after offense. 


Sec. 


Utah Whipping with 


R. S. 






3797- 


a lash. 


1907, 


Louisiana 


Board of Con- 


Acts of 




Sec. 




trol responsible 


1900, 




2266. 




that punishment 


No. 70, 


Wisconsin 


R. S. 




is not harsh or 


Sec. 6. 




1898, 




severe. 






Title 34, 


Maryland 


1 3 lashes max- 


R. S. 




C. 201, 




imum ; warden 


1904, 




Sec. 




may authorize 


Art. 27, 




4923- 




under officers to 


Sec. 640. 








inflict one to five 










lashes; to be re- 










sorted to as little 










as possible. 








Michigan 


Only in pres- 
ence of prison 
physician. 


R. S. 
1897, 

C. 75. 
Sec. 40. 






Mississippi 


Superintend- 
ent allows farm 
sergeants the 
privilege of in- 
flicting corporal 
punishment; 
farm sergeants 
forbidden t h e 
use of intoxi- 
cants. 


R. S. 
1906, 
C. 107, 
Sec. 
3602. 

Sec. 
3617. 






Rhode 


Only under di- 


R. S. 






Island 


rection of at 
least two mem- 
bers of board. 


1909, 
C. 360, 
Sec. 23. 






Texas 


Whipping not 
exceeding 20 
lashes on the 
bare rump and 
thigh to prison- 
ers of the third 
class; strap to be 
of leather, not 
over 2I-2 inches 
wide and 24 
inches long, at- 
t a c h e d to a 
wooden handle; 


R. S. 
1911, 
Title 19, 
Page 
1637- 







(274) 



No. 4] 



Utah 



(A) Permitted in : 

whipping must 
be authorized by 
2 members of 
board of com- 
missioners; phy- 
sician must be 
present; skin of 
con^-ict must not 
be broken. 

Only in pres- 
ence of physi- 
cian. 



HO W MA Y HE BE PUNISHED 

(B) Prohibited in : 



23 



R. S. 
1907, 
Title 57. 
Sec. 
2266. 



8. Showering with Cold Water is prohibited in: 



Michigan 
Montana 
New York 
Utah 

Delaware 



9. Stocks are prohibited in: 
10. Crucifix, Yoke and Buck are prohibited in: 



R. S. 1897, C. 

75, Sec. 40. 
R. S. 1907, Sec. 

9736. 
R. S. 1909, C. 47, 

Art. 6, Sec. 153. 
R. S. 1907, Sec. 

2266. 



Laws of 1905, C. 



New York R. S. 1909, C. 47, 

Art. 9, Sec. 153. 

II. Punishment Injurious to Mind or Body is prohibited in: 
Florida R. S. 1906, Art. 

6, Sec. 4139. 
Kansas Binding the limbs or any member R. S. 1909, C. 

thereof or keeping prisoner in painful 108, Art. 30, 

posture. Sec. 8583. 

12. Greater or More Severe Punishment than Prescribed by Board is pro- 
hibited in: 
Arkansas Officer inflicting such punishment R. S. 1904, Sec. 

guilty of felony and liable to impris- 5923- 

onment from one to five years. If 
death ensues he and his abettors guilty 
of murder or manslaughter. 

(275) 



IV 



HOW CAN HE BE WORKED? 

The prisoner is the property of the state or a subdivision of the 
state while he is in penal servitude. This property right the state 
or its subdivision may lease or retain for its own use, the manner 
being set forth in state constitutions and acts of legislatures.' 



I . He May be Leased to 
(A) Permitted in: 
Alabama State convicts. 



County con- 
victs. 



Individuals for Work Outside the Institution 
(B) Prohibited in : 



R. S. 

1907, 
C. 191, 

Sec. 

6484. 

R. S. 

1907, 
C. 191, 

Sec. 
6580-1. 



Not more than 


R. S. 


20 state orcounty 


1907, 


convicts to be 


C. 191, 


hired to one per- 


Sec. 


son at the same 


6528. 


time. Leasing 




to relatives pro- 




hibited. 




Arkansas County con- 


R. S. 


victs. 


1904, 




Sec. 




IIOI. 


Florida No act leading 


R. S. 


to leasing per- 


1907, 


mitted until July, 


Sec. 


1913- 


4146. 




Acts of 




1911, 




Com. 




Res. 12. 


Louisiana County con- 


Laws of 


victs leased for 


1894, 


road work. 


No. 29. 


No convict 


R. S. 


whose sentence 


1904, 


is for more than 


Page 


2 years to be 


1313. 


leased and none 


Sec. 2. 


to be leased out 




of county where 




convicted. 





Alabama 



Iowa 



Kansas 



Tennessee 



Utah 



Leasing to 
relatives. 



For 
work. 



road 



Em pi oyment 
under contract 
outside prison 
prohibited. 

A misdemeanor 
to hire out a fe- 
male convict, 
either as cook, 
washerwoman or 
for any other 
purpose. 

The labor of 
convicts outside 
the prison 
grounds, except 
on public works 
under the direct 
control of the 
state. 



R. S. 

1907, 
C. 191, 

Sec. 

6528. 

R. S. 

1897. 
Title 4, 

C. 6, 

Sec. 

5654. 
R. S. 
1909, 
Sec. 

8595- 

R. S. 

1897, 

C. 125, 

Sec. 28, 



Const. 

1895, 

Art. 16, 

Sec. 3. 



' Whitin, E. Stagg, " Penal Servitude," Introduction. 
(276) 





HO W CAN HE BE WORKED 


25 




A) Permitted in: 


(B) Prohibited in: 




North 


County pris- 


R. S. 






Carolina 


oners. 


1908, 
C. 24, 
Sec. 
1352. 






South 


County con- 


R. S. 






Carolina 


victs to be leased 
for road work. 


1902, 
C. 20, 
Sec. 
777- 






Tennessee 


The more able- 
bo died short- 
term convicts, 
not otherwise 
employed or that 
cannot be em- 
ployed within 
the walls or on 
the farm, may be 
employed under 
contract in road- 
building, farm- 
ing, etc., where 
competing the 
least with free 
labor. Any con- 
tract of more 
than ninety days 
to be approved 
by Governor, 
Secretary of 
State and Attor- 
ney General. 


Laws of 

1897, 

C. 125, 

Sec. 31. 








2. Leased to Individuals for Work Inside the Institution. 






(A) Permitted in: 


(B) Prohibited in: 




Colorado 




R. S. 

1908, 

C. 108, 

Sec. 


California 


Laws of 

1911, 

P. I. C. 

56. 






4851. 


Georgia No contract 


R. S. 


Connecticut No contract 


Laws of 


whereby con- 


1911, 




for more than 4 


1911, 


tractor is inter- 


Vol. II, 




years. 


C.275. 


ested in amount 


Sec. 


Idaho 




R. S. 
1908, 


of work done by 
prisoners. 


1212. 






Sec. 


Indiana At Reforma- 


Laws of 






8461. 


tory. 


1911, 


Indiana 


Labor of 400 


R. S. 




C. 212. 




convicts to be 


1908, 


Illinois 


R. S. 




leased, and if 


C. 124, 




1909, 




population ex- 


Sees. 




C. 108, 




ceeds 800, fifty 


9845- 




Sec. 79. 




per cent of num- 


9847. 


Kansas R e f rmatory 


R. S. 




ber above 800 to 




prisoners. 


1909, 




be leased also; 






C. 108, 




number of con- 






Art. 131, 




victs in one in- 






Sec. 748. 



(277) 



26 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Iowa 



Kansas 



Kentucky 



Maine 



Maryland 



Massachu- 
setts 



Minnesota 



Nebraska 



(A) Permitted in: 
dustry not to ex- 
ceed I go; no 
contracts to run 
beyond Oct. i, 
1910. 

Warden with 
consent of exec- 
utive council to 
make contracts. 
Contracts to run 
ID years. 

Contracts not 
to exceed 6 years 
and to go to the 
highest bidder; 
price not less 
than 45 cents 
per day per man. 

Contract to run 
4 years. 



Warden to 
make contracts; 
not more than 
20 per cent of 
male convicts to 
be employed at 
one time in one 
industry and, so 
far as practic- 
able, convicts 
to manufacture 
goods not man- 
ufactured else- 
where in the 
state. 

Directors to 
make contracts. 



Copies of all 
contracts at all 
times to be pub- 
lic documents. 

Under name of 
" piece-price." 



As rapidly as 
it can be done, 
state to provide 
for employment 
of convicts on 
its own account; 
contracts not to 
extend over 3 
years. 



R. S. 
1897, 
Sec. 
5702. 



R. S. 
1909, 
C. 108, 
Sec. 
8591. 



R. S. 

1909, 

C. 97. 

Art. I, 

Sees. 13, 

I5> 17- 
R. S. 

1903, 
C. 141. 

Sees. 
19. 31- 



R. S. 

1904, 
Art. 27, 
Sec. 565. 

R. S. 

1902, 
C. 225. 
Sec. 50. 

R. S. 

1905, 
C. 105, 

Sec. 

5447- 
R. S. 
1911, 
Sec. 
IQ166. 



(B) Prohibited in : 
Michigan No new con- 

tracts after Dec. 
II, 1911. 

Minnesota After expira- 
tion of existing 
contracts. 



At Reforma- 
tories. 

Mississippi State convicts. 



County con- 
victs. 



Missouri After expira- 

tion of contracts 
existing in 191 1. 

Montana 



New Mexico 



New Jersey 



New York 



North 
Dakota 



Louisiana 



Ohio 



Oklahoma 



Leasing for 
other than road 
work prohibited. 



Laws of 

1909, 
No. 140. 

R. S. 

1905. 

C. 105, 

Sec. 

5447- 
Sec. 

5458. 

Const. 

1890, 
Art. 10, 
Sec. 223. 
Laws of 

1908, 

S. B. 
No. 83. 

Laws of 
1911, 
S. B. 

No. 23. 

Const. 

1889. 

Art. 18, 

Sec. 2. 

Const. 

1910, 
Art. 20, 
Sec. iS. 
Laws of 

1911, 

S. B. 

ISO- 
Const. 

1904, 
Art. 3, 
Sec. 29. 

R. S. 

1905, 

Sec. 

10394. 

R. S. 

1904, 
Page 

1315. 
Art. 2. 

Const. 

Amdt. 

1912, 

Art. 2, 

Sec. 41. 

Const. 

1907, 

Art. 23, 

Sec. 2. 



(278) 



No. 4] 



HOW CAN HE BE WORKED 



27 





(A) Permitted in: 






(B) Prohibited in: 




Nevada 


State convicts. 


R. S. 


Oregon 


For manufac- 


R. S. 






1912, 




ture of overalls, 


1910, 






Sec. 




shirts, under- 


Sec. 






7561. 




wear, boots or 


4519- 




County con- 


R. S. 




shoes, or any 






victs. 


1912, 
Sec. 
7609. 




clothing, head or 
foot gear of any 
description. 




New Hamp 


Governor with 


R. S. 


Pennsyl- 


After expira- 


R. S. 


SHIRE 


advice of council 


1 90 1, 


vania 


tion of exisiting 


1895, 




makes contracts. 


C. 285, 




contracts, con- 


page 






Sec. 5. 




\dcts to be em- 


3487, 


North 


State prison- 


R. S. 




ployed on behalf 


Sec. 18. 


Carolina ers. 


1908, 




of the state. 








C. 116, 






Sec. 697. 






Sec. 


Utah 




R. S. 






5391- 






1910, 


Oregon 


Contracts not 


R. S. 






Sec. 




to exceed 10 


1910, 






2257. 




years; price not 


Sec. 






Const. 




less than 35 cents 


4518. 






1895, 




per day per man. 








Art. 16, 


South 


Contracts not 


R. S. 






Sec. 3. 


Dakota 


to exceed 5 


1910, 


Washington After Jan. i, 


Const. 




years. 


Title 12, 
Sec. 694. 




1890. 


1889, 
Art. 2, 


Rhode 




R. S. 






Sec. 29. 


Island 




1909, 
C. 360, i 
Sec. 12. 


Wyoming 




Laws of 
1911, 
C. 61. 


Tennessee 


Not more than 
199 men under 
any contract un- 
til July I, 1915. 

County con- 
victs. 


Laws of 
1909, 
H. B. 

789. 

R. S. 

1896, 

Title 7, 

Art. 5, 

Sec. 
7428. 








Vermont 


Contracts not 
to exceed 5 
years. 


R. S. 

1906, 
Title 33, 
C. 260. 

Sec. 

5995- 








Virginia 


Convicts who, 
because of 
health, character 
r disposition, 
are deemed un- 
safe for road 
work, may be 
hired out to work 
at Penitentiar)-, 
pro\aded number 
of convicts so 
hired, exclusive 
of women, does 
not exceed 500; 


Laws of 
1972, 
C. 59- 









(279) 



28 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(B) Prohibited in ; 



(A) Permitted in: 

and provided 

further that the 

present contract 

shall not be re- 
newed; nor shall 

any contract be 

made if convicts 

can be profitably 

worked without 

a contract. No 

contract to ex- 
ceed 5 years. 

Contracts to be 

made with the 

consent of the 

Board of Direct- 

o r s, Governor 

and Secretary of 

State Board of 

Charities, or a 

majority of them, 

of which the 

Board of Direct- 
ors shall be one. 

The tasks pro- 
vided under all 

contracts to be 

fixed by the Su- 
perintendent. 
Wisconsin Contracts not R. S. 

to exceed five 1889, 

years. Sec. 

4938. 

West R. S. 

Virginia 1906, 

Sees. 
4659- 
4677. 

3. The State may work him in State hidustries for State consumption 
California 



Idaho 

Indiana 

Kansas 

Massachusetts 
Missouri 
New Jersey 



Preparing grounds, and manufactur- 
ing material for state sanitarium. 
Reformatory. 

Coal mined by convict labor. 



Extension of market to all public in- 
stitutions, state and county. 



Beginning April i, 1912. at least 300 
state convicts are to be added each year 
to number employed under state use 
till all are so employed. 



Laws of 191 1, P. 

I, C. 56. 
Laws of 1911, C. 

41. 
Acts of 1911, C. 

212. 
R. S. 1909, C. 

108, Art. 30, 

Sec. 8596-8600. 
Laws of 1910, C. 

414. 
Laws of 1912, C. 

565. 
Laws of 1911, C. 
414. 



Laws of 191 1, S. 
B. 150. 



(280) 



No. 4] 



HOW CAN HE BE WORKED 



29 



New York Const. 1894, Art. 

3, Sec. 29, Laws 
of 1909, C. 47, 
Sec. 175. 

" The legislature shall, by law, provide for the occupation and employment 
of prisoners sentenced to the several state prisons, penitentiaries, jails and 
reformatories in the state ; and on and after the first day of January, in the 
year one thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, no person in any such 
prison, penitentiary, jail or reformatory, shall be required or allowed to work, 
while under sentence thereto, at any trade, industry or occupation, wherein or 
whereby his work, or the product or profit of his work, shall be farmed out, 
contracted, given or sold to any person, firm, association or corporation. This 
section shall not be construed to prevent the legislature from providing that 
convicts may work for, and that the products of their labor may be disposed 
of to the state or any political division thereof, or for or to any public institu- 
tion owned or managed and controlled by the state, or any political division 
thereof." — N. Y. State Constitution, 1894, Art. 3, Sec. 29. 



North Dakota 

Ohio 
Pennsylvania 

Utah 

Virginia 
West Virginia 
Wyoming 



Factory for supplying equipment for 
schools and public institutions to be 
established from profits of brickyard. 

County convicts. 



After expiration of existing con- 
tracts convicts may manufacture for 
state institutions. 

The Board of Corrections is author- 
ized to employ such number of con- 
victs as it may deem proper in the 
manufacture of clothing and equipage 
for the national guard. 

Convicts deemed unsafe for road 
work may be employed by the Peniten- 
tiary Board in work for the state. 
Convicts not working on contract or 
hired out may manufacture articles for 
the state. 



Laws of 191 1, C. 
205. 

R. S. 1905, Sec. 

10442. 
Laws of 191 1, H. 

B. 946. 
R. S. 1895, Pg- 

3487, Sec. 18. 

R. S. 1907, Title 
48, Sec. 1477. 



Laws of 1912, C. 

59- 

R. S. 1903. C. 
163, Sec. 39. 

Laws of 191 1, C. 
61. 



4. The State may work him on farms for State consumption: 
New Jersey To be given preference in develop- Laws of 191 1, S. 

ment of state use industries. B. 150. 

Ohio Laws of 191 1. H. 

B. 146. 

5. The S/nle may 7vork him 07t Public Works. 





(A) Permitted in : 




(B 


) Prohibited in : 




Alabama 


County con- 


R. S. 


Alabama 


For women 


R. S. 




victs; to be 


1907, 




convicts. 


1907, 




worked in squads 


C. 191, 






C. 191, 




with other per- 


Sees. 






Sec. 


"="«^"" . . 


2^' sons Hable to 


6580 and 






6582. 


'"'■ 


road duty. 


6581. 


Kentucky 


State convicts. 


Const. 


Bssnans 










1891, 


Arkansas 


j County con- 


R. S. 






Sec. 253 




victs. 


1904, 


Mississippi 


For women 


R. S. 






C. 37, 




convicts. 


1906, 






Sec. 






C. 22, 






1066. 






Sec. 874 



(281) 



30 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Hi 



(A) Permitted in: 
Arizona So that labor 

does not inter- 
fere with free 
labor. 

California County con- 
victs. 



Colorado State convicts. 



County con- 
victs. 

Connecticut Guards to ac- 
company prison- 
ers laboring out- 
side prison walls. 

Delaware 



Florida County prison- 

ers. 

Georgia 



Idaho 



Illinois 



Indiana 



Iowa 



State convicts 
in building walls, 
ditches, etc., on 
prison grounds. 

County prison- 
ers not physically 
disabled. 



I n preparing 
road material, 
fertilizer and 
deepening chan- 
nels of rivers. 

County con- 
nets in county 
wherein con- 
victed. 

County con- 
victs. 



Able bodied 
male convicts; 
not to be leased 
when so employ- 
ed; breaking of 
stone for convicts 
n o t otherwise 
employed. 



R. S. 

1901, 
Title 15, 

Sec. 

1197. 

Penal 

Code, 

1909, 

Sec. 

1613. 
Laws of 

1905, 

C. 86. 
Laws of 

1911, 
C. 130. 

R. S. 

1902, 

Sec. 

2901. 

R. S, 

1893, 

Page 976, 

Sec. 6. 

Laws of 

1907, 
Sec. 110. 

R. S. 

1911, 

Sec. 

1207. 
Laws of 

1911, 
C. 216. 

R. S. 
1901, 
Sec. 
S541- 
8542. 
R. S. 

1909. 
C. 108, 
Sec. 27. 

R. S. 

1908, 

Vol. I, 

C. 4, Sec. 

2189. 

R. S. 

1897, 
Title 26, 
C. I, Sec. 

5653- 
R. S. 
1897, 
Title 26, 
C. 2, Sec. 
5707. 



(B) Prohibited in: 

Wisconsin Stone crushing Acts of 
prohibited for 1909, 

women convicts. C. 333. 



(282) 



No. 4] 



HOW CAN HE BE WORKED 



31 



Kansas 



Kentucky 



Louisiana 



(A) Permitted in: 




Convicts n 1 


R. S. 


employed under 


1909, 


contract or in 


C. 108, 


coal mining. 


Art. 30, 




Sec. 




8604. 


County con- 


Sec. 


victs. 


6942. 




R. S. 




1903, 


County con- 


C. no, 


victs. 


Art. I, 




Sec. 




4322. 


Board to con- 


Acts of 


tract for building 


1900, 


of public roads, 


No. 70, 


levees, and to 


Sec. 14. 



(B) Prohibited in ; 



Maine 



Maryland 



bid in the same 
way as a private 
concern. 

Upon written 
application from 
county or munic- 
ipal authorities, 
Board of Inspec- 
tors may direct 
that jail prison- 
ers be worked on 
county roads. 

Sheriffs of cer- 
tain counties per- 
mitted to work 
convicts over 16 
years of age on 
public roads. 

Prisoners in 
the county jail 
of Garrett county 
whose term of 
commitm e n t 
does not exceed 
one year, may be 
sentenced to 
hard labor on 
the roads of that 
county, under 
the direction of 
the town or 
county commis- 
sioners, but their 
hours of labor 
may not exceed 
ten a day. 

Convicts of 
Frederick county 
may be employed 
by sheriff on the 
public roads of 
the county. 



Laws of 

1905, 

C. 126. 



Laws of 
1906, 
C. 36. 



Laws of 
1912, 

c. 597. 



Laws of 

1912, 

C. 386. 



(283) 



32 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(A) Permitted in: 
Massachu- County con- 
SETTS victs may pre- 

pare road ma- 
terial using only 
hand or foot 
power. 

Empl oyment 
in caring for pub- 
lic lands and 
buildings. 



(B) Prohibited in 



Michigan 



All able-bodied 
state prisoners 
may be placed 
on the county 
roads; the award 
of labor to the 
highest bidder; 
expense of 
guarding "if 
guards are neces- 
sary " is borne 
by prison author- 
ities. Transpor- 
tation, housing, 
food, and tools 
by the county 
road commis- 
sioners; stone 
crushing and 
light work is 
allowed but 
nothing requir- 
ing skilled labor. 
County con- 



R. S. 

1902, 
C. 225, 
Sec. 59. 



R. S. 

1908, 

Page 

1469, 
Sec. I. 
Acts of 

1911, 
No. 181. 



Acts of 



victs. 


1910, 
No. 10. 


Minnesota County con- 


R. S. 


victs. 


1905, 
C. 106, 




Sec. 


Mississippi So that they 


5468. 
Const. 


remain under 


1890, 


state control. 


Art. 10, 




Sec. 


No guarding 


224. 
R. S. 


by trusties. 


1906, 

C. 107, 

Sec. 


Convicts over 


3603. 
C. 22, 


eighteen years of 


Sec. 870 



age and under 
fifty sentenced 
to the farms of. 
four counties 
may be requited 
to work fifteen 



(284) 



No. 4] 



HO IV CAN HE BE WORKED 



33 



Missouri 



Montana 



New Jersey 



(A) Permitted in: 
days on the pub- 
lic roads of the 
counties where 
they are held as 
prisoners. Work 
to be performed 
under supervi- 
sion of Supt. of 
pen. County 
supervisors to 
furnish suitable 
quarters for the 
men. 

300 state con- 
victs may be em- 
ployed on pubhc 
works. 

County con- 
victs. 



State convicts. 



County con- 
victs. 



County con- 
victs. 



Male convicts 
in state prison 
may labor on 
roads if they de- 
sire and if 
warden and 
Board are will- 
ing. 

County con- 
victs leased for 
public works. 

Convict Labor 
Commission to 
formulate plans 
for the use of all 
convicts physic- 
ally able on pub- 
lic roads, in 
public parks, 
forestry and 



Laws of 

1911, 
S. B.,23. 

R. S. 
1909, 

C. 34, 

Art. 5, 

Sec. 

3732-33- 
R. S. 
1907, 

P-3, 

Title I, 

Sec. 

9729- 
R. S. 
1907, 

P-3. 

Title 2, 

Sec. 

9775- 

R. S. 

1911, 
C. 49, 

Sec. 

2695. 
Laws of 

1911, 
C. 71. 



Laws of 
1912, 
J. R. 

No. 5. 



(B) Prohibited in ; 



(285) 



34 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(A) Permitted in: 




other ways for 




public benefit. 




County-board 


Laws of 


of Chosen Free- 


1912, 


holders to make 


C. 223. 


application, stat- 




ing number of 




prisoners desired. 




Prison Labor 




Commission, in 




connection with 




governing body 




of institution to 




determine num- 




ber to be as- 




signed, cost of 




transportation, 




maintenance and 




c m p e n s ation 




and may enter 




into agreement. 




Any moneys law- 




fully available 




for roads may 




be spent in hous- 




ing and feeding 




such convicts. 




New Mexico Appropriation 


Laws of 


of $5000.00 for 


1903. 


guards and ma- 


c. 56. 


terials for road 




works. 




Prisoners to be 


Laws of 


so worked when- 


1909, 


ever possible. 


C.42. 


County pris- 


Laws of 


oners. 


1909, 




C. 89. 


No convict to 


R. S. 


go out to labor 


1897, 


unguarded, un- 


Sec. 


less he be a 


3528. 


trusty. 




New York Appropriation 


Laws of 


of $10,000 for 


1912, 


construction of 


c. 530. 



(B) Prohibited in ; 



highways by con- 
vict labor in vicin- 
ity of Clinton and 
Great Meadow 
prisons. 

Not to exceed 
300 convicts on 
highways. 

Convict labor 
may be employed 
by the conserva- 
tion commission 
i n propagating 



Laws of 

1909, 

C. 47. 

Sec. 179. 

Laws of 
1912, 

C. 444- 



(286) 



No. 4] 



HOW CAN HE BE WORKED 



35 



(A) Permitted in: 






trees and in field 






planting. 




North 


Convicts hired 


R. S. 


Carolina 


to counties or 


1908, 




municipalities. 


Sec. 
5411- 




County con- 


R. S. 




victs. 


1908, 

Sec. 

1355- 


North 


A 1 1 convicts 


Laws of 


Dakota 


not otherwise 


1909, 




employed. 


C. 133- 


Ohio 


Stone crush- 


Laws of 




ing. 


1911, 
S. B. 
238. 


Oklahoma 


State prison- 


Laws of 




ers. 


1909, 

c. 32, 

Sec. 50. 




County prison- 


Laws of 




ers. 


1909, 
C.32. 

Sec. 40. 


Oregon 


County con- 


R. S. 




victs. 


1910, 

Sec. 

6432-34. 




Expense of 


R. S. 




extra guards for 


1910, 




road work to be 


Sec. 




borne by state 


4521. 




board of agricul- 






ture. 




Pennsyl- 


10 per cent, of 


R. S. 


vania 


the inmates of 


1909, 




any workhouse. 


p. 5622, 
Sec. I. 


South 


Convicts who 


Const. 


Carolina 


are able-bodied 


1895, 




are placed on 


Art. 12, 




chain-gang un- 


Sec. 6. 




less otherwise 


Laws of 




provided by spe- 


1911, 




cial order of the 


No. no. 




judge. 






County con- 


R. S. 




victs. 


1902, 

Title 3, 

C. 32, 

Sec. 657. 


South 


County con- 


R. S. 


Dakota 


victs. If Sheriff 


1907, 




can work con- 


Title 12, 




victs more profit- 


Sec. 745. 




ably outside jail. 





( B) Prohibited in ; 



(287) 



36 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Tennessee 



Texas 



Utah 



Virginia 



(A) Fermitted in : 
Counties to 
construct and 
maintain porta- 
ble, movable or 
stationary work- 
houses for work- 
ing prisoners 
upon the public 
roads. 

Legislatures to 
make provisions 
for using convict 
labor on public 
roads. 

County con- 
victs. 



County Com- 
missioners to 
make regulations 
for state prisor.- 
ers to work on 
roads laid out by 
road commission. 

County prison- 



All persons 
convicted of 
crime and sen- 
tenced to hard 
labor on the pub- 
lic roads, prior to 
May 1st, 1913, 
and after that 
date all persons 
sentenced to con- 
finement in the 
Penitentiar)- and 
all persons con- 
fined in our pub- 
lic jails shall, 
when delivered 
to the Superin- 
tendent of the 
Penitentiary, con- 
stitute theconnct 
road force. 

Prisoner con- 
victed of felony 
prior to May ist, 
191 3, may be 
sentenced to 
vpork on public 
roads. After 
Mayf 1st, 1913, 



(B) Prohibited in; 



Laws of 
1907, 
S. B. 
239- 



Const, 

1876, 

Art. 16, 

Sec. 24. 

R. S. 

1911, 

Title 104, 

C.3, 
Sec. 
6238. 
Laws of 
1911, 
C. 76. 



Laws of 
1909, 

C. 89. 

Sec. 15. 

Laws of 
1912, 
C.58. 



Laws of 
1912, 
C. 59- 



C288) 



No. 4] 



HOJV CAN HE BE WORKED 



37 



(A) Permitted in: 




all male prison- 




ers, except such 




as Superintend- 




ent deems un- 




safe, because of 




condition of 




health, character 




or disposition, 




shall be subject 




to work on pub- 




lic roads. 




Vermont State prison- 


R. S. 


ers — Supt. may 


1906, 


employ as many 


Title 33, 


as lo state con- 


C. 260, 


victs at one time 


Sec. 


outside prison 


5996-7- 


walls. 




County con- 


R. S. 


victs. 


1906, 




Title 33, 




C. 262, 




Sec. 




6105. 


Washington County con- 


R. S. 


victs. 


1910, 




Sec. 




3895- 


State convicts. 


R. S. 




1910. 




Title 68, 




C. 4, 




Sec. 




8575- 


Wyoming Any convict 


R. S. 


may work on 


1910, 


public highways 


C. 418, 


or streets. 


Sec. 




6401. 



(B) Prohibited in; 



6. The State may ivork him on State Farms for Community Consumption: 



Arkansas 



PYORIDA 



Georgia 



Board of Commissioners to purchase R. S. 1904, C. 

or lease and equip a farm or farms 123, Sec. 5855. 

to pay for the same out of the labor or 
products of the labor of the convicts, 
or they may select any lands of the 
state and clear and improve and estab- 
lish a farm, on the same of sufficient 
area to employ all convicts able to 
work. 

Female, aged, diseased, crippled, de- Laws of 

formed, or otherwise unable to per- No. 72- 

form manual labor to be withheld from 
lease and employed on farm. 

Reformatory prisoners. R. S. 1911, 

1243. 

Convicts not engaged in work for R. .S. 1911, Sec. 

municipalities or counties, or convicts 1214. 

considered dangerous and not safe on 
public works. 

(289) 



1909. 



Sec. 



38 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Louisiana 

Michigan 
Mississippi 

North Carolina 
North Dakota 
Oregon 

Pennsylvania 



South Dakota 
Tennessee 
Texas 
Utah 

Virginia 

Wisconsin 

7. The State may 
Arkansas 

California 

Delaware 

Illinois 



Indiana 
Michigan 
Minnesota 
Missouri 



Females, aged, diseased and infirm, 
and boys under fifteen. 

Board of Control with ai)proval of 
Governor to purchase or lease a tract 
of land to be cultivated by convict 
labor. 

Warden has power to employ con- 
victs on farm. 

Legislature to purchase farms and 
have convicts work thereon under 
state supervision. 

Purchase of state farms authorized. 



State Board of Agriculture author- 
ized to make requisition for use of 
convict labor on state fair grounds. 

The Board of Inspectors of the West- 
ern Penitentiary is empowered to se- 
cure one thousand five hundred acres 
of forest land and take the necessary 
steps toward the erection of a suitable 
institution. The able-bodied male con- 
Aacts are to assist in the improvement 
of the tract and construction of the 
building. 

Farming and stone quarrying out- 
side prison walls authorized. 

One member of Board to superintend 
and manage all farming operations. 

For countv convicts. 



R. S. 191 1, Sec. 

1205. 
R. S. 1904, Page 

1307, Sec. ID. 



R. S. 1897, Sec. 

2110. 
Const. 1890, Art. 

ID, Sec. 225. 

R. S. 1908, C. 

107, Sec. 5063. 
R. S. 1905, Sec. 

10368. 
R. S. 1910, Sec. 

4521. 

R. S. 191 1. No. 
37- 



R. S. iqio. Title 
12, Sec. 683. 

Laws of 1897, C. 
I2i;, Sec. II. 

R. S. 191 1, VoL 
5, Page mo. 

R." S. 1910, Title 
74, Sees. 2254, 
2259. 

Laws of 19 1 2. C. 
59- 

R. S. 1889, C. 
201, Sec. 4927. 

ork him in Slate Factories for Community Consumption: 

R. S. 1904, Sec. 

5856. 
Laws of 191 1. P- 

I, C. 56. 
R. S. 1893, Page 

428, Sec. 14. 
R. S. 1909, C. 

108, Sees. 87- 

90. 



Convicts deemed unsafe for road 
work may be employed by the Peniten- 
tiary Board on the state farm. 

Warden may employ convicts outside 
walls in stone quarrying or on farm. 



Jute bags and crushing of stone. 
Stone crushing. 



Industries to be assigned to different 
institutions due regard beng paid to 
location of prison, market, and ma- 
chinery already installed and number 
of convicts. 

Surplus articles from Reformatory. 

Binder twine, Manufacture of 
chairs, Detroit House of Correction. 



Binder twine. 



R. S. 1908, Sec. 

9921. 
Acts of 1907. No. 

211. 
R. S. 1905. Sec. 

5448. 
Laws of 191 1. S. 

B. 23. 



(290) 



No. 4] 

Montana 
New Mexico 
North Dakota 

Tennessee 
Virginia 



Washington 
Wisconsin 



HOW CAN HE BE WORKED 



Binder twine; jute bags. 



Lindur twine. 

Brick making, manufacture of farm 
implements authorized. 

Mining, one member of Board to 
superintend all mining operations. 

Convict Lime Board consisting of the 
Governor, Superintendent of the Peni- 
tentiary and Commissioner of Agricul- 
ture created to provide for working 
long-term or desperate convicts in the 
manufacture of ground lime stone or 
oyster shells. Board may acquire by 
gpift, purchase or lease suitable lime- 
stone quarries and suitable deposits of 
oyster shells convenient to transporta- 
tion by rail or water. Board to see that 
competent and reliable men are placed 
in charge of the machinery. When- 
ever possible convicts to be used for 
all the work of the plants. No one 
purchaser to secure more than one car 
load during any one year, if there are 
other applications therefore. Product 
not to be sold to purchaser except for 
his own use. 

As many convicts as possible to be 
employed in the manufacture of jute. 

Binder twine. 



39 

Laws of 1909, H. 

J. R. 6. 
R. S. 1897, Sec. 

3548. 
Laws of 1909, C. 

228. 
Laws of 1911, C. 

204. 
Laws of 1897, C. 

125, Sec. 12. 
Laws of 1912, C. 

295- 



R. S. 1910, Sec. 

8555. 
Laws of 1911, C. 

377- 



8. The State may work him Under Specific Limitations: 

The unfair competition of prison goods with the products of 
free labor before the introduction of state production for state 
consumption resulted in the introduction of methods which 
should in part le.ssen the injurious competition. 



Colorado 

Georgia 
Illinois 
Tennessee 
Utah 



Competition with Free Labor prohibited in: 

Convicts shall not be used in build- 
ing bridges or similar structures which 
require the employment of free labor. 



Industries to compete as little as 
possible with free labor. 

Diversified lines of industry to be 
selected so as to interfere as little as 
possible with industries of the State. 



R. S. 1908, C. 
108, Sec. 4880. 

R. S. 19 II. Sec. 

1212. 
R. S. 1909, C. 

108, Sec. 77. 
Laws of 1909, H. 

B. 789. 
R. S. 1910, Title 

74, Sec. 2257. 



The limitation of output in lines affected was the prevailing 

(291) 



40 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



remedy, based on the theory that where the quantity was small 
the debasing effect of the goods on the market would be small. 
As the limitation upon the quantity of output was difficult to 
legislate upon and in a field in which the union men were not 
versed, the limitation was placed upon the number of con- 
victs that could be employed on any one commodity' and the 
restriction upon the use of machinery. 



Number of Convicts in One Industry Limited: 



Massachusetts Not more than 30 per cent of the 

convicts may be employed in any in- 
dustry except cane-seating and um- 
brella making. 

Brushes not more than 80 men ; 
chairs with wood frames not more than 
80 men ; clothing other than shirts or 
hosiery not more than 375 men ; har- 
ness not more than 50 men ; mats not 
more than 20 men ; rattan chairs not 
more than 75 men ; rush chairs not 
more than 75 men ; shirts not more 
than 80 women ; shoes not more than 
375 men ; shoe heels not more than 125 
men; stone cutting not more than 150 
men ; laundry work not more than 100 
men. 

Minnesota Number of convicts in any one in- 

dustry not to exceed 10 per cent of 
total number of persons engaged in 
such industry in the state, unless 
needed to produce articles for State or 
Charitable institutions. Number in 
each industry to be determined by a 
commission consisting of the State 
Labor Commissioner, a member of the 
Board of Control and a citizen not 
connected with the prison, the last two 
appointed by the Governor. 

This provision does not apply to the 
number of prisoners employed in 
manufacture of binder twine, binder, 
mowers, and rakes at Stillwater, nor 
to number manufacturing brushes at 
Cloud, nor to number hereafter em- 
ploj'ed at Stillwater in any industry 
not now carried on in the State. 

Pennsylvania Not more than ^ per cent of inmates 

to manufacture brooms and hollow- 
ware nor 10 per cent other goods. 

Ohio Total number employed in the manu- 

facture of any one kind of goods 
manufactured elsewhere in the State 
not to exceed 10 per cent of the num- 
ber of persons in the .'^tate outside the 
Penitentiary employed in such manu- 
facture. 

(292) 



R. 



S. 1903, C. 
225, Sec. 48. 



. S. 1902, C. 
225, Sec. 47. 



. S. 190S, C. 
105, Sec. 5449. 



. S. 1909, C. 
105, Sec. 5449- 



,. S. 1903, Page 
3488. Sec. 26. 

.. S. 1910, Div. 
4. C. 3, Sec. 

2244. 



No. 4j HOW CAN HE BE WORKED 4 1 

The Use of Machinery is forbidden in: 

Illinois No more motive power or machinery R. S. 1909, C. 

other than hand or foot than is abso- 108, Sec. 80. 
lutely necessary. 

Indiana All work done under State account R. S. 1908, C. 

to be hand work if possible. 124, Sec. 9850. 

Pennsylvania ^ R. S. 1902, Page 

3489, Sec. 28. 

Similar prohibitions are found for the manufacture of any 
goods which would compete with any goods manufactured in 
the state in which the prison was located. 

The manufacture of goods manufactured by free industries in the State is pro- 
hibited as follows: 

Idaho No contract shall be let to perform R. S. 1908, Part 

any labor which shall conflict with any 3, Title I, C. 

existing manufacturing industries of i, Sec. 8461. 

the state. 

Michigan No mechanical trades shall here- Const. 1850, Art. 

after be taught the convicts in the state 18, Sec. 3. 

prisons of this state except the manu- 
facture of those articles of which the 
chief supply for home consumption is 
imported from other states or coun- 
tries. 

Utah Board to select diversified industries R. S. 190". Title 

with reference to interfering as little 74. C. 10, Sec. 

as possible with the same lines ot m- 2257. 

dustry carried on by citizens of the 
state. 

The branding of prison goods, or the use of a prohibitory 
license have been the subject of statutes in many states, though 
held unconstitutional pending the action of Congress.^ 

The Branding of convict-made goods and licensing the sale of convict-made 
goods is permitted in: 

California Each and every article manufactured Laws of 191 1. 

under the provisions of this act shall Page 72. Art. 8. 

have plainly marked or stamped 
thereon either the words " San Quen- 
tin Prison " or the words " Folsom 
Prison ", according as such article may 
be manufactured at one or other of 
said prisons. 

Colorado No convict-made goods shall be sold R. S. 1908, C. 

without a license from the Secretary 29, Art. 2, Sec. 

of State. This license is to be con- 835. 

spicuously posted in the dealer's place 
of business. License fee is $500. 
License must be renewed every year. 
Goods are to be plainly marked and 

^ Kempf vs. Francis, Xo. 9, Oct. Term, 1912. Filed Jan. 6, 1913. 
^ 157 N. Y., I. "Hawkins' Case." 

(293) 



42 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



IXDIAXA 



Louisiana 



KcNTrCKY 



Mains 



Xkw Jersey 



New York 



Ohio 



branded " convict made ". Bond of 
$5,000 must be furnished for the faith- 
ful observance of the law. 

Requirements as to license, bond, fee, 
etc., same as in Colorado. All con- 
vict-made clothing must have linen 
label sewed on each article in a con- 
spicuous place. 

It shall be unlawful for any corpor- 
ation, merchant or other person, in the 
State of Louisiana, to deal in or sell 
brooms, made in the different state 
penitentiaries, by convicts or other per- 
sons confined therein, unless each 
broom is stamped or labeled " convict- 
made " ; said label or stamp to be not 
less than four inches long, two and a 
half inches wide, and the letters thereof 
not less than one inch in size. Anv 
corporation, merchant or other person 
violating the provisions of this act 
shall, on conviction thereof, be fined 
not less than fifty dollars, or be im- 
prisoned in the parish jail, for not less 
than thirty days, for each offense, at 
the discretion of the court. 

All goods made in prison outside of 
the state, must be plainly marked "con- 
vict made ". Penalty for removal of 
mark — year's imprisonment and fine of 
$500. Xo one shall have convict-made 
goods in his possession for the purpose 
of sale that are not so marked. 

All articles and goods manufactured 
at the prison for sale shall be distinctly 
labeled or branded with these words, 
" Manufactured at the Maine State 
Prison." 

All goods made in whole or in part 
within the state prison and intended 
for sale to be plainly marked " Manu- 
factured in the New Jersey state 
prison," or if impractical to mark ar- 
ticle, package or box in which goods 
are contained to be plainly marked. 

No one shall offer for sale or sell or 
have in his possession for the purpose 
of sale, any convict-made goods with- 
out a license from the State Comp- 
troller. This license renewable every 
year. Fee $500. Application for 
license to be accompanied by bond of 
$5,000 for the faithful observance of 
the law. Requirements as to marking 
goods same as in Colorado. Penalty 
for violation, fine of not less than $100 
nor more than $1,000, or imprisonment 
not less than ten days, or by both fine 
and imprisonment. 

Goods manufactured in this or any 
other state to be branded " convict 

(294) 



Acts of 1901, P. 
618. 



R. S. 1904, Page 
433- 



R. S. 1909, C. 30, 
Sees. 524-526. 



R. S. 1903, C. 
141, Sec. 32. 



R. S. 1910. Page 
4916. 



Penal Law iqoq. 
Art. 60. 



R. S. iqio, C. 16, 
Sees. 62i-?.62 



ID, * 

i8.| 



No. 4] 



HOW CAN HE BE WORKED 



43 



made ". Such brand to be placed out- 
side of and upon the most conspicuous 
part of the finished article and its box, 
crate, or covering. When the Commis- 
sioner of Labor has reason to believe 
this statute has been violated he shall 
notify the Attorney-General who shall 
institute proceedings. 

Oklahoma Any article manufactured by con- Laws of 1910, H. 

victs in any prison or penitentiary of B. No. 21. 

any state of the U. S., or in any fed- 
eral prison or penitentiary, before being 
sold or offered for sale shall bear a 
label to be placed on the outside of the 
most conspicuous part of the article. 
Any person found guilty of violating 
this act shall be fined not less than 
$100 or more than $500.00. 

Oregon All goods made in any penitentiary, R. S. 191 1, IL B. 

prison, or reformatory shall be plainly 82. 

branded " convict made ", followed by 
year and name of the penitentiary in 
plain English lettering. If it is im- 
practical to brand articles label shall 
be placed on the box or other cover- 
ing. Any person violating this act shall 
be sentenced to pay a fine of not ex- 
ceeding $1,000. 

Pennsylvania All goods, wares, etc., manufactured R. S. 1903, P. 

in any prison, etc., whether for the 3488, Sees. 22- 
direct benefit and maintenance of such 25. 

institution or under contract made by 
the authorities with any third party 
shall be placed on the package or other 
covering ; mark always to be placed 
upon the most conspicuous part of the 
article or box. Goods shipped to 
points outside the state shall not be so 
branded. Fine not exceeding $1000 or 
imprisonment for one year. Any per- 
son offering such goods for sale with- 
out license shall be subject to a fine 
not exceeding $500 or imprisonment 
for 6 months. 

Wisconsin All goods manufactured in a prison, R. S. 1898, C. 

etc.. in any state except this state, shall 202, Sec. 4960. 

be branded "convict made". If im- 
practical to brand articles, packages or 
boxes in which they are contained, 
must be clearly marked. It is the duty 
of the Commissioner of Labor and the 
District Attorneys to enforce this law. 

Special interests have attempted to secure statutes prohibit- 
ing the prison manufacture of the special commodities from 
the sale of which thev' secured a livelihood. 



(295) 



44 THE CAGED MAN [Vol. Ill 

The Manufacture of Certain Articles is prohibited in: 

CONXECTICUT Tobacco or any article which in its R. S. 1902, Sec. 

use comes into contact with the mouth 2902. 

of human being. 

Indiana Manufacture of school desks, print- R. S. 1908, C. 

ing of school books or any books ex- 124, Sec. 9920. 

cept for use in institution, at Reforma- 
tory. 

M.'VINE Wagons, sleighs and carriages ex- R. S. 1903, C- 

cept infants' carriages. 141, Sec. 31. 

Maryland Tin cans for oyster and fruit packing R. S. 1904, Art. 

purposes, or iron stoves for heating or 27, Sec. 565. 

cooking purposes, or iron castings for 

machinery purposes. 

Massachusetts Engraving. R. S. 1902, C. 

225, Sec. 26. 

New York Printing and photo engraving. R. S. 1909, C. 47, 

Sec. 176. 

The unhealthful conditions prevailing in certain prison 
workshops has resulted in special provisions prohibiting dan- 
gerous trades. 

Work Injurious to Health or Dangerous to Person of Convict is prohibited in: 

Kansas R. S. 1909. C. 

108, Sec. 8595. 
Kentucky R. S. 1909, C. 97, 

Art. I, Sec. 17. 
South Dakota R. S. 1910, Title 

12, Sec. 696. 

The introduction of free laborers into tlie prison workshops 
during the hours of labor so as to supplement the labor of 
prisoners and aid in the development of state workshops for 
the production of commodities for sale in the open market has 
been prohibited by statute.^ 

Association with Free Laborers during Work Hours is prohibited in: 

Kentucky R- S. 1909, Sec. 

3809. 

The avoidance of expense is sought by means of a statute. 

Labor 7vhich can be carried on without expense to county and is consistent 
with safe-keeping of prisoner is permitted in: 

New Hampshire R- S. 1901, C. 

282, Sec. 14. 

His hours of labor are limited. The desire to restrict the 
quantitA' of the goods he may produce has prevented his over- 
exertion, while militating against his efficiency. 

^ See, Whitin, Penal Servitude, pp. 67-69. 

(296) 



No. 4] 



HOIV CAN HE BE WORKED 



45 



Nevada 
New Mexico 

Colorado 

Delaware 

Florida 

Idaho 

Minnesota 

New York 

Pennsylvania 

Utah 

Wisconsin 

New Jersey 
West Virginia 

Arkansas 

Kansas 

Louisiana 

Maryland 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Missouri 

North Dakota 
Oregon 

Tennessee 

South Dakota 



Hours fixed at six per day: 

County convicts ; when weather per- 
mits. 

County prisoners ; between 9 and 4 
p. m. 

Hours fixed at eight per day: 

Misdemeanants. 

Between 8 a. m. and 5 p. m. 

Not less than 8 or more than 10. 

County prisoners. 

No convict to labor more than 8 
hours per day at stone work. 

County prisoners. 



Hours fixed at nine per day: 



Hours fixed at ten per day: 



County convicts; not to begin before 
6 a. m. 



Male prisoners over 16 and under 50 
to labor not more than 10 hours per 
day. 

Eight hours per day from Oct. IJ 
to April 15; ten hours per day from 
April I? to October 15. 



R. S. 1912, Sec. 

7619. 
Laws of 1909, C. 



Laws of 191 1, C. 

130. 
R. S. 1893, Page 

426, Sec. 5. 
R. S. 1906, Art. 

6, Sec. 4138. 
R. S. 1901, Sec. 

8542. 
R. S. 1905, C. 

105, Sec. 5458. 
Prison Law 1909, 

Art. 171. 
R. S. 1909, Page 

5622, Sec. I. 
R. S. 1907, Sec. 

2263. 
Laws of 1909, C. 

333- 

Laws of 191 1, S. 

B. i;o. 
R. S. 1903, Sec. 

4672. 

R. S. 1904, Sec. 

5899- 
R. S. 1909, Sec. 

8595. 
R. S. 1904, Page 

1313, Sec. 4. 
Laws of 1906. C. 

36- 
R. S. 1897. C. 75. 

Sec. 38. 
R. S. 1905. C. 

106, Sec. 5468. 

R. S. 1909, Sec. 
1657. 

Laws of 190Q, C. 

228. 
R. S. 1910. Sec. 

4^18. 
R. S. 1896. Title 

7, Art. 2, Sec. 

7512. 



Hours determined by 7'arious proznsions : 
Constant employment for benefit of 



state. 



R. S. iqio. Title 
12, C. I. Sec. 
674. 



(297) 



46 



THE CAGED MAN 



Supreme Court to make rules. 



Hours to be determined by discretion of Prison Board: 
Arizona R. S. 1901, Title 

56, C. 2, Sec. 

3589. 
Penal Code 1909, 

Sec. 1586. 
R. S. 1902, Title 

17, C. 176, Sec. 

2899. 
R. S. 191 1, C. 

35, Sec. 1 196. 
R. S. 191 1, Sec. 

1 199. 
R. S. 1909, Sec^ 

3812. 
Laws of 1903, C 

141, Sec. 4. 
R. S. 1906, C. 

107, Sec. 3592. 
R. S. 1907, Sec. 

9717. 
R. S. 1911, C. 51,. 

Sees. 2743-4. 
R. S. 1912, Sec- 

756g- 
R. S. 1901, C. 

285, Sec. 5. 
R. S. 1899, Sec. 

3491- 
R. S. 1908, C. 

116. Sec. 5391. 
R. S. 1910, Div. 

4. C. 2, Sec. 

2159. 
Acts of 1908, H. 

B. 715. 
R. S. 1909, Title 

38, C. 360, Sec. 

2. 
R. S. 1906, Sec. 

5Q90. 
R. S. 19 10. Title 

68. Sec. 8521. 

(298) 



California 
Connecticut 

District of 
Columbia 
Georgia 

Kentucky 

Maine 

Mississippi 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New Hampshire 

New Mexico 

North Carolina 

Ohio 

Oklahoma 
Rhode Island 

Vermont 
Washington 



State prisoners. 

Discretion of governor and council. 

State prisoners. 



V 



HOW IS HE MAINTAINED? 



Supplied with a bunk, the prisoner is required to keep it 
according to certain regulations and is protected in the use 
of it by regulations. 



Alabama 



Arkansas 



California 



Colorado 



Connecticut 



Delawarb 



District of 
Columbia 
Florida 



Georgia 



I. Bunking. 

White and colored prisoners to be 
housed separately. Fine of $ioo for 
jailer who houses them together if 
there is sufficient accommodation to do 
otherwise. 

Separation of white and colored pris- 
oners, male and female. 

Separate cells for all convicts at 
night. 

Beds of straw ; sufficient number of 
blankets. 

County — Some suitable woman to 
have charge of women prisoners ; they 
must not see or be seen by or converse 
with male prisoners ; guard may not 
search women prisoner or enter her 
cell except in presence of matron. 

County — Sheriff responsible for 
cleanliness of jails; prisoners under 
civil process to be kept separate from 
those under criminal process. Separa- 
tion of sexes. 

Warden to make regulations. 

County — Prisoners on civil process 
not to be lodged in same rooms as those 
held on criminal process. County to 
provide suitable bedding and fuel. 

Sheriff paid as much per day as 
Levy Court decides for bedding, etc. 

Separation of males and females and 
young prisoners from hardened of- 
fenders. 

All regulations to be made by Su- 
preme Court. 

Allowance of bedding the same as 
fixed by the U. S. army regulations. 

Separation of white and negro con- 
victs at all times when not at work. 

Separation of sexes and races on 
farm. 

.Separation of races and sexes and 
first offenders from hardened criminals. 

(299) 



R. S. 1907, C. 
192, Sec. 6619. 



R. S. 1904, C. 
123, Sees. 5900- 
5901. 

Penal Code 1909, 

Sec. 1587. 
Penal Code 1911, 

Title 2, Part 3, 

Sec. 16 16. 



R. S. 1908, C. 74, 
Sees. 3585-7. 



R. S 1902, Sec. 

2901. 
R. S. 1902, Sees. 

2945 & 2929. 



R. S. 1893. C. 54, 

Sec 3. 
Laws of 1898, C. 

247. 

R. S. 1911, C. 35, 

Sec. 1 196. 
R. S. 1906, Art. 

6, Sec. 4132. 
Sec. 4142. 

R. S. 1906, Sec. 

4117. 
R. S. 1911, Vol. 

2, Sec. 1203. 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Idaho 



Illinois 



Indiana 



Iowa 



Kansas 



Kentucky 



Total supplies for institution, in- 
cluding salaries of officers and all other 
expenses connected therewith, not to 
exceed 85c. per day per prisoner. 

Separate cells for all prisoners 
whenever possible. 

County — All jails to contain a suffi- 
cient number of cells to allow prison- 
ers belonging to the following classes 
to be separated : Civil from criminal ; 
persons convicted from those detained 
as witnesses ; male from female. 

State — Female convicts to be sent to 
some other state where there is a wo- 
man's prison. 

State — Commissioners to make all 
regulations. 

County — Debtors and witnesses not 
to be confined in same room as persons 
committed to crime. 

Separation of males and females 
and young prisoners from hardened 
offenders. Keepers to furnish prison- 
ers with sufficient clean water daily to 
provide for personal cleanliness. 

Jail to be kept in a healthful condi- 
tion and whitewashed with lime at least 
once every three months ; rooms 
wherein prisoners are confined to be 
whitewashed once a month between 
May and November. Keeper to see 
constant attention is paid to cleanli- 
ness of prisoners. 

Clean straw beds, sufficient cover- 
ings for comfort of prisoners. Separ- 
ation of young prisoners from hard- 
ened offenders and of males and 
females. 

Keeper responsible that jail is kept 
in a healthy, cleanly condition and for 
personal cleanliness of the prisoners. 
Each prisoner to be furnished daily 
with sufficient clean water for drink 
and personal use and with a clean 
towel once a week. 

Separate apartments for females in 
all jails. 

Young prisoners to be separated from 
hardened offenders. 

State — Separate rooms for sexes. 

County — Sheriff to supply fuel ; juve- 
nile prisoners to be separated when 
possible. 

Prison commission to make rules 
necessary for the preservation of the 
convict's health and general sanitary 
arrangements of the Penitentiary. 

Warden at regular intervals to cause 
all cells to be thoroughly cleaned and 
aired; to see that sufficient clean, com- 
C300) 



R. S. 1908, Sec. 
8468. 



R. S. IQ08, Sec. 

8494. 
R. S. 1908, Sec. 

8526. 



R, 


. S. 
851S 


1908, 


Sec. 


R 


. S. 


1909, 


c. 




108, 


Sec. I, 


3- 


R. 


, S. I 


909, c. 


75. 




Sees. 


11-16. 





Sees. 20 & 32. 



R. S. 1908. C. 
124, Sees. 9863 
& 9814. 



R. S. 1897, Title 
26, Sec. 5640. 



Sec. 5639. 

Sec. 5638. 

R. S. 1909, C. 60, 

Sec. 4559- 
Sec. 4575. 



R. S. 1909, Sec. 
3812. 



Sec. 3797- 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE MAINTAINED 



49 



Louisiana 



Maine 



Maryland 



Massachusetts 



Michigan 



Minnesota 



Mississippi 



Missouri 



fortable bedding is provided for each 
convict ; cells and bedding to be thor- 
oughly inspected at least once a week. 

Count}' — Jails to be kept clean and 
free from nauseous odors ; to be kept 
comfortably warm. Each prisoner to 
have sufficient bed clothing to be paid 
for out of county levy. 

Separation of male and female, 
blacks and whites at Penitentiary. 

Police jury to make regulations for 
convicts working under its supervision. 

Sheriff responsible for cleanliness of 
jail ; walls to be whitewashed annu- 
alh' and attention paid to cleanliness of 
prisoners. 

Inspectors to make recommendations 
to county commissioners as to im- 
provement in sanitary conditions, heat- 
ing, lighting, etc., of jail. 

Separation of sexes; walls to be 
whitewashed at least three times a 
year ; warden to take proper meas- 
ures for the health and cleanliness of 
the prisoners and to see convicts pay 
proper attention to their person. 

All penal institutions to be well ven- 
tilated, beds of good quality and suffi- 
cient covering for comfort of prison- 
ers, to include matress, blankets and 
pillows ; strict attention to be paid to 
cleanliness ; clean towels weekly ; 
clothes not to be washed at night or 
hung wet in room occupied by pris- 
oner. 

Bedding to be plain but of good 
quality and sufficient quantity for 
comfort of convict. 

Fuel and comfortable bedding to be 
provided for county convicts by super- 
visors. 

Bedding of coarse material ; separate 
cells for all prisoners whenever pos- 
sible. 

County — Separation of males and 
females, youthful prisoners from hard- 
ened criminals, insane from other pris- 
oners ; as far as possible each prisoner 
to have a separate cell ; sheriff to see 
jail is kept clean. 

Separation of races and sexes. 

County — Separation of sexes. 

Board of supervisors to establish 
rules for housing of county convicts. 
Bedding of coarse material. 

County — Civil and criminal cases to 
be kept separate, also females and 
males. Grand jury to visit jail monthly 
and examine conditions thereof. 

(301) 



R. S. 1909, C. 73, 
Sec. 2236. 



Acts of 1900, No. 

70, Sec. 6. 
R. S. 1908, Page 

623, Sec. 7. 
R. S. 1903, C. 82, 

Sec. 38. 



Laws of 1909, C. 
126. 



R. S. 1904, Art. 
27, Sees. 595-6 
& 630. 



R. S. 1902, C. 
225, Sec. 30. 



R. S. 1897, C. 76, 
Sec. 25. 

R. S. 1897, C. 86, 
Sec. 6. 

R. S. 1905, C. 

105, Sees. 5435, 

5439- 
R. S. 1905, C. 

106. Sec. 5475. 



R. S. 1906. C. 

107, Sec. 3625. 
R. S. 1906. C. 22, 

Sec. 874. 
Sec. 843. 

R. S. 1909, Art. 

IQ, Sec. 1637. 
R. S. 1009. Art. 

18. Sees. 1576 

& 1583. 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Montana County jails to contain sufficient 

cells to permit separate confinement of 
persons committed for civil or crimi- 
nal causes ; males from females and 
persons held under sentence from those 
held as witnesses. 

Board of Commissioners to make 
rules in regard to management of Peni- 
tentiary. 

Nebraska Bedding of coarse material ; when 

there are sufficient cells convicts to be 
confined separately. 

Count}' — Judges of district courts to 
make rules as to cleanliness of jails 
and prisoners, beds, heating, lighting 
and ventilating of jail. 

New H.^mpshire Jailers to provide bedding, etc. 

Governor to establish rules for health 
and comfort of prisoners. 

New Mexico Board of commissioners to make 

regulations for Penitentiary. 

County commissioners to ^^sit jails 
at least twice a year and carefully ex- 
amine as to cleanliness, etc. Sheriff to 
keep jails clean and healthy and ob- 
serve special care as to habits of clean- 
liness among the prisoners. 

New Jersey Each convict to have a separate cell. 

County — Female prisoners to be re- 
moved as far possible from male ; 
female guards to watch such prisoners 
day and night. 
New York Separate cells for all prisoners. 

County — Civil and criminal prisoners 
to be housed separatel}' ; also male and 
female. 
North C.'VROLin.a State — Directors to make all ar- 
rangements for sanitarj- condition of 
Penitentiary. 

County — Jails must have at least 5 
separate and suitable compartments, one 
for white male criminals, one for white 
female, one for colored males, one for 
colored females, one for other prison- 
ers. Cells to be so heated as to be 
warm and comfortable; bedding to be 
furnished, including good warm blank- 
ets. Sheriff or keeper to daily cleanse 
all occupied rooms in cell house. 
North DaK0T.\ County commissioners to examine at 

least yearly as to health and cleanliness 
of prisoners. Keeper to see jail is con- 
stantly kept in a clean and healthful 
condition and that strict attention is 
paid to personal cleanliness of all pris- 
oners ; each prisoner to be furnished 
with clean water daily and one clean 
towel per week. 



R. S. 1907, Part 
3, Title 2, Sec. 
9760. 



R. S. 1907, Part 
3, Title I, Sec. 
97I7- 

R. S. 1911, Sees. 
10179, 10180. 

Sec. 10137. 



R. S. 1901, C. 

282, Sec. 4. 
C. 28s, Sec. 5. 

R. S. 1897, Sec. 

3498. 
R. S. 1897, Title 

7, C. 9, Sees. 

823-827. 



R. S. 1910, Page 
4912, Sec. 7. 

Laws of 191 1, C. 
137. 



R. S. 1909, C. 27, 

Sec. 151. 
R. S. 1909, C. 47, 

Art. 13, Sees. 

345-6. 
R. S. ic)o8, C. 

116, Sec. 5390. 

R. S. 1908, C. 24, 
Sees. 1336-7-8 
& 1343- 



R. S. 1905, C. 19, 
Sees. 10434-8. 



No. 4] 



HOW IS BE MAINTAINED 



51 



Ohio 



Oklahoma 



Oregon 



Pennsylvania 



Rhode Island 



State — Males and females to be 
housed separately ; separate cells for all 
prisoners at night. 

Board of managers make all ar- 
rangements. 

County — Sheriff to examine the con- 
dition of each prisoner at least once a 
month. Cells to be whitewashed at 
least three times a year. 

Court of common pleas to regulate 
cleanliness of prison and prisoners, 
warming, lighting and ventilating of 
jail. 

Separate cells for prisoners. 

State — Regulations to be made by 
board of control. 

County — Courts to make rules for 
cleanliness of prisoners, classification as 
to sex, age, crime, etc. ; also as to beds 
and warming, lighting and ventilating 
of jail; county commissioners to inspect 
at least once a week and to examine in 
regard to cleanliness. Jailer to keep 
jail clean and to be responsible for 
cleanliness of prisoners ; prisoner to 
have all necessary clean water and a 
clean towel weekly. 

All jails not previously standing to 
be built of brick or stone, floor of 
cement, ceiling of plaster, iron or steel, 
roof of metal, slate or non-combustible 
material, doors of iron or steel, windows 
of glass with no more wood than is 
necessary ; whole structure as nearly 
fire-proof as possible. 

Male and female prisoners to be kept 
separate. 

In everj' county of 100,000 a discreet, 
capable matron shall have charge of 
women prisoners. 

State — A sufficient number of cells 
to provide for solitary housing of 
prisoners. 

Countj' — Keepers responsible for 
sanitary arrangement. 

Warden to see convicts are cleanly as 
to their persons. 



Jailer to supply all necessities and to 
be allowed the amount fixed by law for 
support of prisoners. 
South Carolina Lodging to be carefully provided for 
in all contracts. 

County commissioners to furnish 
blanket and such other bedding as 
shall be necessarj' for persons con- 
fined in jail; criminal prisoners to be 
provided with at least 2 blankets in 
winter. 

(303) 



R. S. 1905, Code 
of Criminal 
Procedure, C. 
17, Sec. 10360. 

R. S. 1910, Div. 
4, C. 2, Sec. 
2159- 

R. S. 1910, C. 14, 
Sec. 3160. 



R. S. 1910, C. 4, 
Sec. 3162. 



I, C. 



Sec. 3168. 
Laws of ic 
22. 

R. S. 1903, Sees. 
5750 & 5719- 



R. S. 1910, C. 14, 
Sec. 4527. 



Sec. 4533. 
Sees. 4535-6. 



R. S. 1903, Page 
3485, Art. I. 

R. S. 1903, Pa^ 
2010, Sec. I. 

R. S. 1909, C. 
360, Sees. 23 & 
38. 

C. 358, Sec. 4. 



R. S. 1902, Title 

2, C. 2,z, Sec. 

684. 
R. S. 1902, Title 

2, C. 32, Sec. 

652. 



52 

South Dakota 



Tennessee 



Texas 



Utah 



Vermont 



Virginia 



Washington 



West Virginia 



THE CAGED MAN 

State — Prisons to be kept clean ; per- 
sonal cleanliness of convicts to be en- 
forced ; prisoners to have all clean 
water necessary ; clean towel once a 
week. 

Convicts to be confined in separate 
cells at night and in day time inter- 
course between them to be prevented as 
far as possible ; all communications 
between male and female convicts to 
be prevented. 

County — Judges of circuit court to 
make regulations for cleanliness of 
jails, separation of sexes, etc., and for 
warming, lighting and ventilating jails. 

Chairman of board to make regula- 
tions for housing. 

Young and old prisoners, males and 
females, white and colored to be separ- 
ated ; separate cells for all convicts at 
night. 

County — Jailer to keep jail clean and 
to remove all filth from cells once in 
every 24 hours ; se.xes to be separated. 

Separation of sexes and races. 

County — Commissioners to see jails 
are clean and well ventilated and not 
overcrowded and beds comfortable for 
prisoners. 

Whenever there is a sufficient number 
of cells prisoners shall be kept separate 
at night and when unemployed. 

County — Separation of male and 
female prisoners, also criminal from 
civil prisoners. Women to be under 
care of suitable matron. 

Prisons to be arranged for complete 
separation of sexes. 

County — children under 16 to be 
separated from hardened criminals. 

-State — All cells to be whitewashed 
twice a year by convicts, and floors to 
be washed as often as necessar}-. 

County — Jails to be whitewashed at 
least twice a year, properly aired, and 
always clean. Prisoners to have proper 
beds and bedding. Jails to be warmed 
in winter. 

Beds of straw, or other suitable ma- 
terial. Sufficient covering of blankets. 

County — Superior judges to make 
rules as to cleanliness of jails, classifi- 
cation of prisoners in regard to sex, 
beds, warming, lighting and ventilation. 

i^tate — Board to make regulations. 

County — Separate apartments for 
prisoners ; every apartment to be kept 
comfortable. 

(304) 



[Vol. Ill 

R. S. 1910, Title 
12, Sec. 740. 



Sec. 674. 



R. S. 19x0, C. 4, 
Sec. 720. 



R. S. 1896, Sec. 

7469. 
R. S. 1897, Title 

7, Art. 4. Sees. 

7520-1. 

Sees. 7484, 7522- 
7527- 

R. S. 191 1, Sees. 

6209-62 1 1. 
R. S. 191 1, Sees. 

c;io8-mio. 



R. S. 1907, Sec. 
2265. 

R. S. 1907, Title 
15, C. 7, Sec. 
577- 

R. S. 1906, Sec. 

6082. 
R. S. 1906, Title 

-?3, C. 262, Sec. 

6116. 
R. S. 1904, Title 

55, Sec. 412S. 

R. S. 1004, C. 42, 
Sec. 928. 



R. S. 1910, Title 
68. C. 2. Sec. 
8520. 

R. S. 1910, C. I, 
Sec. 849?. 



R. S. 1906, C. 

163, Sec. 4638. 
R. S. 1906, C. 39» 

Sec. 1212. 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE MAINTAINED 



53 



Wisconsin 



Jails to be whitewashed twice per 
year ; bedding to be kept clean, and 
apartments warm. 

County — Jails to be kept in a clean 
and healthy condition ; attention to be 
paid to personal cleanliness of prison- 
ers ; clean water daily ; clean towel 
weekly ; criminal and civil prisoners 
to be separated ; also separation of 
sexes. 



2. Food is supplied according to varying standards: 



R. S. 1906, C. 39, 
Sec. 1342. 

R. S. 1889, Title 
34, C. 202, Sees. 
4950, 4952. 



Alabama Sufficient good, wholesome food for 

county convicts. 

State — Sound and wholesome food. 

Arizona County — Sheriff allowed reasonable 

compensation for board of prisoners. 
Arkansas State — Sufficient wholesome food. 

County — Sheriff to provide needy 
prisoners with food sufficient for their 
support. 

California State — Sufficient plain, wholesome 

food as to conduce to health of pris- 
oners. 

County — Sheriff to provide necessary 
food for which he shall be allowed rea- 
sonable compensation to be determined 
by board of supervisors. 

County — Keeper to supply food at 
his own expense ; board of commission- 
ers to allow him reasonable amount 
per day for dieting prisoners. 

Connecticut Warden to arrange food. 

County — Prisoners permitted to pro- 
vide their own supplies provided con- 
sent of sheriff is obtained. 

Delaware Sheriff paid by prisoner as much per 

day as Levy Court determines ; pris- 
oner detained until payment of board 
which shall be added to other costs. 
All prisoners except convicts to pro- 
cure their food at their own cost and 
to send for same. 

District of Attorney-general to pay for subsist- 

Columbia ence of prisoners such sum as it actu- 

ally costs to subsist them. 

Florida Allowance of food the same as stand- 

ard fixed by U. S. Array regulations. 
Leasees to provide suitable food ac- 
cording to directions of board of com- 
missioners. 

Georgia Prison commissioners to regulate 

food. 

Idaho Sufficient quantity of substantial, 

wholesome food. 

County — Sheriff to supply necessary 
food for which he shall be allowed 
reasonable compensation by county. 

(305) 



R. S. 1907, C. 

192, Sec. 6609. 
R. S. 1901, Sec. 

6538. 
R. S. 190X, Title 

IS, Sec. 1194. 
R. S. 1904, Sec. 

S920. 
R. S. 1904, C. 91, 

Sec. 4402. 

Penal Code 1909, 

Part 3, Title i. 

Sec. 1587. 
R. S. 1909, Part 

3, Title 2, Sec. 

1611. 

R. S. 1909, C. 74, 
Sec. 3'585. 



R. S. 1902, Sec. 

2901. 
R. S. 1902, Sec. 

2930. 

R. S. 1893, C. 54. 
Sec. 3. 



R. S. 1911. C. 35, 
Sec. 1204. 

R. S. 1906, Art. 
6, Sees. 4132, 
4150. 



R. S. 191 1, Vol. 

2, Sec. 1 199. 
R. S. 1908, Sec. 

8405. 
R. S. 1908, Part 

3, Title 3. Sec, 
8539- 



54 

Illinois 
Indiana 



Iowa 



Kansas 



Kentucky 



Louisiana 



Maine 



Maryland 



Massachusetts 
Michigan 

Minnesota 



THE CAGED MAN 

State commissioners to make regula- 
tions in regard to food. 

County — Keeper to furnish sufficient 
well-cooked food three times a day. 

Coarse, wholesome food, not less than 
three-quarters of a pound of meat, and 
sufficient vegetables to conduce to 
health. 

Count}' — Sheriff to provide meat and 
drink for jail prisoners unless they are 
able to supply themselves. 

Nine dollars per month allowed for 
support of each convict at Fort Madi- 
son, and $9.50 at Anamosa. 

County — Jail prisoners to be served 
daily with three well-cooked meals. 

State — Board of Directors to make 
regulations. 

County — Sheriff to supply proper 
bread, meat and drink. 

Prison Commission to make regula- 
tions for food. 

County — Keeper of jail to receive 75 
cents per day per person for keeping 
and dieting. 

Food and rations not to be less than 
those prescribed by U. S. Army regu- 
lations for soldiers. 

Police juries to regulate fees of sher- 
iffs for keeping prisoners. Compen- 
sation not to be less than 25 cents per 
diem per prisoner, or more than 50 
cents per diem. 

Inspectors to make regulations in 
regard to food. 

County — Prisoners to be supplied 
with food ; all expenses over earnings 
from labor to be met by county. 

Three meals a day consisting in all 
of one and one-quarter pounds flour, 
three-quarters of a pound of beef or 
half a pound of bacon of good, coarse 
quality, one herring, one gill of mo- 
lasses, one pint of potatoes or vege- 
tables with soup, rye-coffee, tea and salt. 

Three meals a day of wholesome 
food. 

Food plain but of good quality and 
sufficient quantity for sustenance and 
comfort of convicts. 

Board of Supervisors to provide 
food for county convicts. 

Sufficient quantity of substantial, 
wholesome food. 

County — Sheriff to be paid for board 
of prisoners, the sum averaging from 
71 to 120 cents per prisoner per day; 3 
meals per day of sufficient well-cooked 
food ; meat once a day but no butter or 
other luxuries except on Sunday. 
(306) 



[Vol. Ill 

R. S. 1909, L. 

108, Sec. 13. 
R. S. 1909, C. 75. 

Sec. 16. 
R. S. 1908, C. 

124, Sec. 9863. 



R. S. 1908, C. 
124, Sec. 9814. 

R. S. 1897, Title 

26, C. 2, Sec. 

5718. 
R. S. 1897, Title 

36, Sec. 5640. 
R. S. 1909, C. 

108, Sec. 8563. 
R. S. 1909, C. 60, 

Sec. 4559. 
R. S. 1909, Sec. 

3812. 
Laws of 1910, C. 

96. 

R. S. 1904, Sec. 
2866. 

R. S. IQ04, Page 
1767, Sec. I. 



R. S. 1903, Title 

12, C. 141, Sec. 

II. 
R. S. 1903, Title 

12, C. 82, Sees. 

43, 44. 
R. S. 1904, Art. 

27, Sec. 597. 



R. S. 1902, C. 

225, Sec. 30. 
R. S. 1897, C. 75. 

Sec. 25. 

R. S. 1897, C. 86, 

Sec. 8. 
R. S. 1905, C. 

105, Sec. 5435. 
R. S. 1905. C. 

106, Sees. 5473- 
6. 



No. 4] 



Mississippi 



Missouri 



Montana 



Nebraska 



New Hampshire 



New Mexico 



New Jersey 



New York 



HOW IS HE MAINTAINED 

Coarse, wholesome, well-cooked food ; 
vegetables in season. 

County — Board of supervisors to 
make regulations. 

Board to make regulations ; prison- 
ers to have nothing more except under 
physician's orders. 

County — Prisoners, except those con- 
victed of felony to send for their own 
food and drink. 

Board of commissioners to make 
regulations. 

County — Sheriff to provide food for 
which he shall be allowed reasonable 
compensation. 

Substantial, wholesome food. 

County — Sheriffs to receive 70 cents 
per day per prisoner from which to 
provide food and other necessities. 

Governor to provide for purchase of 
supplies. 

Countj' — Jailer to provide food for 
which county commissioners shall al- 
low him reasonable compensation. 

For each one hundred rations per day 
is allowed: 60 lbs. bacon, or 150 lbs. of 
fresh meat, 112 lbs. flour, 30 lbs. beans 
or 15 lbs. rice, 10 lbs. coffee or 2 lbs. 
tea, 15 lbs. sugar or molasses, 4 qts. 
vinegar, 4 lbs. salt, 8 lbs. soap, 6 ozs. 
pepper, 3 lbs. baking powder. 

County — Jail prisoners to be fur- 
nished food of sufficient quantity 3 
times a day. 

Plain food at discretion of keeper, 
subject to approval. 

County — Sheriffs allowed 15 cents per 
day for feeding prisoners. 

Sufficient quantity of inferior but 
wholesome food. 

County — Sheriff to make regula- 
tions. 



North Carolina Board to. make regulations. 



North Dakota 



Oklahoma 



County — I lb. of good bread, i lb. of 
good meat and other necessities daily. 

Coarse, wholesome food, sufficient 
quantity of meat and vegetables for 
health of convicts. 



County — 3 meals a day of whole- 
some, well-cooked food. 



Board of control to make regula- 
tions. 

(307) 



55 

R. S. 1906, C. 

107, Sec. 3640. 
R. S. 1906, C. 22, 

Sec. 843. 
R. S. 1909, Art. 

19, Sec. 1637. 

R. S. 1909, Art. 
18, Sec. 1582. 

R. S. 1907, Part 

3, Title I, Sec. 

9717. 
R. S. 1907, Part 

3, Title 2, Sec. 

9773- 
R. S. 191 1, Sec. 

10180. 
R. S. 191 1, Sec. 

10147. 

R. S. iqoi, C. 

285, Sec. 5. 
R. S. 1901, Title 

35, C. 282, Sec. 

4- 
R. S. 1897, Sec. 

3545- 



R. S. 1897, Title 
7, C. 9. Sec. 
827. 

R. S. 1910, Page 
4912, Art. 7. 

Laws of 19 1 1, 
Sec. 279. 

Prison Law 1909, 
C. 47, Sec. 152. 

Prison Law 1 909, 
C. 47, Art. 3, 
Sec. 340. 

R. S. 1908, C. 
116, Sec. i;390. 

R. S. 1908, C. 24, 
Sec. 1343. 

Code of Crimi- 
nal Procedure, 
1905, C. 17, 
Art. 7, Sec. 
10362. 

Code of Crimi- 
nal Procedure, 
1905, Sec. 

10438. 

Laws of 1908, C. 
22, Art. I. 



56 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. in 



County — Prisoners to be served three 
times dailj' with good, wholesome food 
in sufficient quantity. 

Oregon Jail prisoners to be supplied by 

keeper with wholesome food. 

Ohio Board of managers to make regula- 

tions. 

Pennsylvania No prisoners to receive anything but 

prison allowance of food. 

County — Keepers to supply food. 

Rhode Island No convict to receive anything but 

prison allowance of food unless by 
order of physician. 

South Carolina Sufficient plain, wholesome food. 



County — Food to be carefully pro- 
vided for in all contracts. 

Such proportion of meat and vege- 
tables as warden deems best for health 
of convict. 

County — Three meals a day of whole- 
some, well-cooked food. 



South Dakota 



Tennessee 



Texas 
Utah 

Vermont 
Virginia 

Washington 



Each convict to have ample supply 
of bread, -)4 'b. of bacon, i lb. of pork 
and Y2 lb. of beef and such quantities 
of coffee, sugar, molasses and vege- 
tables as provided by law. 

County — 2 meals a day of good, 
sound bread and meat well cooked, 
with vegetables at one of the meals. 
Plenty of water twice a day from 
May to November ; once a day from 
November to May. 

.Sufficient plain and wholesome food. 



Food of ])lain, good quality suffi- 
cient for sustenance and comfort. 

County — Sheriff to supply food for 
which he shall be allowed a reasonable 
sum. 

Keeper of jail to ])rovide good board. 



Bread of Indian meal or other coarse 
bread. One meal a day of coarse meat. 
Board of directors may regulate diet 
for good cause. 

County — Wholesome food of suffi- 
cient quantity- 
Sufficient food of plain and whole- 
some variety as may be most conducive 
to good health. 

County — Grand jury of each county 
to inspect food. 

(308) 



R. S. 1903, Sec. 
5719- 

R. S. igio. Sec. 

4534- 
R. S. 1910, Div. 

4, C. 2, Sec. 

2159. 
R. S. 1903, Page 

3494, Sec. 12. 
R. S. 1903, Page 

2010, Sec. I. 
R. S. 1909, C. 

360, Sec. 39. 

R. S. iq02,Crim- 
inal Code, C. 
Z2,, Sec. 684. 

R. S. 1902, C. 33, 
.Sec. 684. 

R. S. 1910, Code 
of Criminal 
Procedure, Sec. 

675- 
R. S 1910, Code 

of Criminal 

Procedure, Sec. 

740. 
R. S. 1896, Title 

7, Art. 2, Sec. 

7481. 



R. S. 1896, Title 
7, Art. 6, Sec. 
7430- 



R. S. 191 1, Title 

104, C. 2, Art. 

6205. 
R. S. 1907, Sec. 

2243. 
R. S. 1907, Title 

i;, C. 7, Sec. 

580. 
R. S. 1906, Title 

2,2,, C. 262, Sec. 

6117. 
R. S. 1904, Title 

55, Sec. 4127. 



R. S. 1904, C. 42, 

Sec. 928. 
R. S. iqio. Title 

68, C. 2, Sec. 

8520. 
R. S. 1910, Title 

68. C. I, Sec. 

8503. 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE MAINTAINED 



57 



West Virginia 



Wisconsin 



Board of directors makes regulations. R. S. 1906, C. 

162, Sec. 4638. 
County — Wholesome and sufficient R. S. 1906, C. 41, 



food. 

Wholesome, coarse food with such 
proportion of meat and vegetables as 
the warden shall deem best for health 
of prisoners. 

County — Good, well-cooked food. 



Sec. 1342. 
R. S. 1889, Sec. 
4919. 



R. S. 1898, Title 
34, C. 202, Sec. 
4950. 

3. Clothing prescribed by the Board, unless the law designates a uniform or 
permits the use of citizens' clothing: 

(a) Prison uniform required: 
Alabama Coarse and cheap uniform to dis- R. S. 1907, Sec. 

tinguish from other persons. 6537. 

Arkansas Uniform prescribed by board. R. S. 1904, Sec. 

5920. 
California Clothing to distinguish grades of Penal Code 1909, 

state prisoners. Sec. 1578. 

County — Boards of supervisors to Penal Code 1909, 
provide distinctive clothing for county Sec. 1614. 
convicts. 

Uniform to be determined by board R. S. 1906, C. 3, 

Art. 2, Sec. 
4116. 



Florida 
Mississippi 



of commissioners. 

Coarse, strong penitentiary stripes. 



Missouri 

Nevada 

New Jersey 
North Carolina 
Rhode Island 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Virginia 
Washington 

Nevada 



Uniform prescribed by inspectors. 

Garb of first-grade prisoners one 
color throughout ; garb of second- 
grade prison stripes ; garb of third- 
grade trousers of prison stripes ; red 
shirts. 

Comfortable clothing of coarse ma- 
terial, uniform in color and make. 



R. S. 1906, C. 

107, Sees. 3641 

& 3602. 
R. S. 1909, Sec. 

1637- 
R. S. 1912, Sec. 
1583. 



R. S. 1877, Page 

1251, Art. 211. 

R. S. 1908, Sec. 

5415- 
R. S. 1909, C. 
360, Sec. 17. 



Only reformatory convicts exempt 
from wearing garb. 

Uniform to be determined by board. 

Comfortable garments of coarse, cheap R. S. 1896, Title 

material, made in uniform and peculiar 7, Art. 4, Sec. 

style so as to distinguish convicts from 7524. 
other persons — style to be determined 
by commissioners. 

Except for third-class prisoners or as R. S. 1911, Title 

punishment stripes are abolished and 104, C. 2, Art. 

a suitable uniform substituted. 6202. 

Distinctive uniform for each sex R. S. 1904, Title 

made of coarse material. SS> Sec. 4124. 

Garments of coarse, substantial ma- R. S. 1910, Title 

terial of distinctive manufacture. 68, C. 2, Sec. 

8520. 

(b) Citizens' clothing permitted: 

Stripes need not be worn by con- Laws of 191 1, C. 
victs engaged in road work. 71. 

(309) 



THE CAGED MAN 



New Hampshire Appropriation of $700 to carry out 
vote of Governor and Council to change' 
the clothing of the prisoners. 

North Carolina Reformatory prisoners need not wear 
convict garb, 
(c) Other provisions as to clothing, and care of 

Iowa Prisoners to be furnished with clean 

shirts once a week. 

Massachusetts Shirts to be washed weekly; male 

prisoners shaved, and all prisoners 
bathed. 

Shirts to be washed weekly. 



North Dakota 
Oklahoma 
Rhode Island 

South Dakota 
Tennessee 

Wisconsin 



Shirts to be washed weekly. 

A change of underclothing to be fur- 
nished each prisoner weekly. 

Shirts to be washed weekly. 

Jailer to have 2 pieces of clothing 
for each prisoner washed every week 
and to furnish necessary apparatus for 
shaving once a week. 

Shirts to be washed weeklv. 



(310) 



Laws of 1907, C. 
49. 

R. S. 1908, Sec. 

5415- 
person : 
R. S. 1897, Title 

26, Sec. 5640. 
R. S. 1902, C. 

225, Sec. 30. 

R. S. 1905, C. 19, 

Sec. 10438. 
R. S. 1903, Sec. 

5719- 
R. S. 1909, C. 
360, Sees. 23 & 

38. 
R. S. 1910, Sec. 

740. 
R. S. 1897, Title 

7, Art. 4, Sees. 

7481 & 7431- 

R. S. 1889. Titlr. 
34, C. 202, Sec. 
4950. 



VI 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR? 



A physician is provided with powers of inspection into the 
conditions of the individual and tlie healthfulness of his sur- 
roundings and with certain powers to remedy conditions. The 
supervision of punishment devolves upon the physician. 



Alabama 



Arizona 



Arkansas 



I. Health and Medical Inspection: 

Physician inspector to vasit at least 
twice a year every county jail and alms 
house in the state and to aid in secur- 
ing just, humane and economic man- 
agement of such institutions. Also to 
aid in securing erection of sanitary 
buildings for accommodation of the in- 
mates and to investigate the manage- 
ment of such institutions and the con- 
duct and efficiency of persons charged 
with their management. County Court 
to attend within 30 days to recom- 
mendations of inspector and in event 
his recommendations are not carried 
out inspector may have convicts re- 
moved to jail of another county at ex- 
pense of county. For failure to comply 
with inspector's recommendation a fine 
of from $25 to $500 may be imposed. 

State Convicts — Physician inspector 
reports monthly to president of board 
of inspectors conditions, health and 
sanitary arrangements of the institu- 
tions with recommendations for nec- 
essary change. He devotes entire time 
to care of convicts. 

Fully qualified physician, resident at 
prison. 

Convicts to be removed to place of 
safety when contagious disease or pesti- 
lence endangers their health. 

Physician attends all sick convicts ; 
examines cells weekly as to cleanliness 
and ventilation, food as to quality, 
quantity and general conditions, and 
convicts as to physical ability to labor; 
to report any convict likely to die of 
incurable disease, which convict may be 
pardoned. Physician has full charge 
of hospital and selects nurses from 
among the convicts. 

(311) 



R. S. 1907, Sees. 



Laws 191 1, No. 
303 & No. 530. 



R. S. 1 90 1, Title 
56, C. 2, Sec. 

3585. 
R. S. 1901, Title 
15. Sec. 1191. 

R. S. 1904, C. 
123, Sees. 5884- 
5889. 



6o 

California 
Colorado 



Connecticut 



District of 
Columbia 
Florida 



Georgia 



Idaho 



Fl I.INOIS 



THE CAGED MAN 

Jail prisoners to be removed in event 
of pestilence or contagious disease. 

Hair cutting for sanitary purposes. 

Physician in good standing to per- 
form such daily duties as commission- 
ers determine. 

Removal of convicts to place of 
safety in case of pestilence or con- 
tagious disease. 

Jail prisoners — Suffering from con- 
tagious disease to be removed to quar- 
antine. 

Physician in good standing to visit 
prison once a month or when commis- 
sioners request. 

Physician skilled in treatment of in- 
sane to act as consulting physician. 

Prisoners suffering from venereal 
disease whose discharge would be dan- 
gerous to public health to be detained 
in institution until physician reports 
such danger overcome. 

Provision to be made for care of 
sick jail prisoners. 

Prisoner suffering from a malignant 
disease or malady which will be incur- 
able during his term of imprisonment 
to be discharged. 

Supreme Court to make rules neces- 
sary to health of prisoners. 

Physician to visit prison hospital at 
least once each day. 

Leassees to provide medical care for 
sick convicts ; such convicts to be in- 
spected daily by a physician designated 
by board of state institution and to be 
paid from profits of contract ; he shall 
prohibit sick convict from working and 
see that provisions for care of convicts 
are carried out. 

Physicians for convict camps may 
continue the regular practice of their 
profession. 

Grand juries to inspect jails in re- 
spect to sanitary conditions. 

Physician to examine cells and all 
sanitary arrangements of the prison 
and the food and clothing of convicts 
once a week. 

In case of pestilence convicts to be 
removed to place of safety. 

County Commissioners to inspect 
jails once every three months and see 
that necessary precautions are taken 
against sickness or infection. 

Prison physician to attend to all the 
wants of sick convicts ; to examine 
weekly as to cleanliness and ventilation 
(312) 



[Vol. Ill 

R. S. 1909, Penal 
Code, Title 2, 
Sec. 1608. 

Sec. 1615. 

Acts of 1909, H. 
B. No. 149. 

R. S. 1908, C. 
108, Sec. 4890. 

R. S. 1908, C. 
115, Sec. 5058. 

R. S. 1902, Title 
18, C. 176, Sec. 
2906. 

Sec. 2904. 

R. S. T902, Title 
18. C. 176, Sees. 
2975-6. 



Sees. 2935 

2941. 
Sec. 2943. 



R. S. 1911, C.35, 
Sec. 1 196. 

R. S. 1906, Title 

4, C. 2, Art. 5, 
Sec. 4133. 

R. S. 1906, Div. 

5, Title 4, C. 2, 
Sees. 4150-1. 



R. S. 191 1, Sec. 
1 196. 

R. S. 191 1, Sec. 

1 196. 
R. S. 1908. Part 

3, Title I, C. 2, 

Sec. 8483. 

R. S. 1908. Part 

3, Title I, C. 3, 

Sec. 8490. 
R. S. 1908. Part 

7,, Title 3. Sec. 

8543. 

R. S. 1909, C. 
108, Sec. 32. 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



61 



of cells ; to examine quantity and qual- 
ity of food weekly. 

Keeper to supply medical aid for jail 
prisoner. 

Indiana Prison physician to have general 

oversight as to health of convicts. 

Iowa Prison physician to have oversight of 

health of convicts. 

Keeper to supply medical aid for jail 
prisoners. 
Kansas Prison physician to have care of 

health of prisoners. 

County to provide medical aid for 
sick prisoners. 

Kentucky Prison physician to have full care of 

sick convicts ; to manage hospital and 
make recommendations as to food, etc., 
after daily visiting the kitchen. 

County — Jail physician to be ap- 
pointed in all counties having popula- 
tion of 150,000 or more. 

Louisiana Physician to visit convicts at least 

three times a week. 

Lessees to provide medical aid for 
county convicts. 

12Y2 cents extra allowed for diet of 
sick convicts. 

Maine Prison physician to have oversight 

of health of convicts. 

County to provide medical aid for 
jail prisoners. 

Maryland Prison physician to visit prison 

daih' and to examine prisoners on ad- 
mission, noting bodily defects for direc- 
tion of warden in assigning tasks. 

Massachusetts Prison physician to care for all state 

and county prisoners. 

Prison camp and hospital to be estab- 
lished. 

Michigan Prison physician to examine all sick 

convicts and cells for purpose of regu- 
lating ventilation and cleanliness, etc., 
and to superintend all corporal pun- 
ishment. 

County supervisors to provide medi- 
cal aid for sick convicts. 

Minnesota State board of health to have super- 

vision over construction and equip- 
ment of penal institution in regard to 
sanitary arrangements. 

Prisoners to be removed to place of 
safety in case of epidemic of con- 
tagious disease endangering their lives. 

Mississippi Prison physician to give entire time 

to care of convicts. 

Missouri Prison physician to attend all sick 

convicts, and examine weekly as to ven- 
tilation of cells, cleanliness, etc., also 
as to quantity, quality and condition of 
food. 



R. S. 1909, C. 75, 

Sec. 19. 
R. S. 1908, C. 

124, Sec. 9838. 
R. S. 1897. Title 

26, C. 2, Sec. 

5672. 
R. S. 1907, Title 

26, Sec. 5643. 
R. S. 1909, C. 97, 

Sec. 6840. 
R. S. 1909, C. 97. 

Art. 16, Sec. 

6907. 
R. S. 1909. C. 97, 

Sec. 3802. 



R. S. 1909. C. 73, 
Sec. 3237. 

Acts of 1900, No. 

70, Sec. 8. 
Acts of 1894, No. 

29, Sec. 4. 
R. S. 1904, Sec. 

2837. 
R. S. 1903. C. 

141. Sec. z:^. 
R. S. 1903. C. 82, 

Sec. 46. 
R. S. 1904, Art. 

27. Sees. 613- 

623. 

R. S. 1902, C. 

225, Sec. TOO. 
R. S. 1908, Page 

1478. 
R. S. 1897. C. 75. 

Sec. 2094. 



R. S. 1897, C. 86, 

Sec. 5. 
R. S. 1905, C. 29, 

Sec. 2131. 



R. S. 1905, C. 
105, Sec. 5442. 

R. S. 1906. C. 

107, Sec. 3598. 
R. S. 1909. C. 19, 

Sec. 1646. 



62 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Montana 
Nebraska 

New Mexico 
New Hampshire 

New Jersey 
New York 



North Carolina 



North Dakota 



Ohio 



County to provide medical aid for 
sick prisoners. 

County Commissioners to take neces- 
sary precautions against sickness or 
infection. 

Prison physician who shall be a 
member of penitentiar)' medical board. 

Judges of district courts to make 
rules as to employment of medical and 
surgical aid for sick convicts. 

Prison physician who shall express 
no opinion as to disability of prisoner 
except on his record. 

Warden to make regulations for 
health of prisoners. 

Jailers to provide necessary medi- 
ical aid for prisoners. 

Prison physician to visit each pris- 
oner once a week or oftener if the state 
of his health requires ; he has super- 
vision over cleanliness, ventilation and 
diet. 

Prison physician to attend daily all 
sick convicts, and to examine cells as to 
cleanliness, etc., weekly and to examine 
food daily. 

County — supervisors to appoint phy- 
sician. 

Prisoners to be removed to place of 
safety in case of contagious disease. 

Same provisions for county prisoners. 

All prisoners to be examined in re- 
gard to tuberculosis 
after confinement. 

Separate cells for 
victs. 

Cells for tubercular prisoners in 
either jails or state prisons to be thor- 
oughly fumigated before being used 
for any other purpose. 

A parcel of land not exceeding 6 
acres to adjoin each jail and all pris- 
oners not committed for treason or 
felony, giving bond to sheriff of 
county to keep within rules, to walk 
therein out of the prison for the bene- 
fit of their health. 

Prison physician to perform duties 
prescribed by board. 

Judges of district courts to make 
rules for employment of proper medi- 
ical and surgical aid for convicts. 

State — Prison physician to perform 
duties prescribed by board. 

County — Medical care to be supplied. 



(314) 



within 5 days 
tubercular con- 



R. S. 1909, C. 19, 

Sec. 1601. 
R. S. 1907, Part 

3, Title 2, Sec. 

9777- 
R. S. 191 1, Sec. 

10107. 
R. S. 1911, Sec. 

10137. 

R. S. 1897, Sees. 
3531-3- 

R. S. 1901, C. 

285, Sec. 4. 
R. S. 1901, C. 

282, Sec. 4. 
R. S. 1910, Page 

4912, Art. 5. 



Prison Law, 1909, 
C. 47, Art. 6, 
Sec. 138. 

Sec. 348. 

Sec. 155. 

Sec. 351. 
R. S. 1908, Sec. 
1343- 

R. S. 1908, C. 

116, Sec. 5390. 
R. S. 1908, C. 24, 
Sees. 1336 & 

1343- 

R. S. 1908, C. 24, 
Sec. 1339. 



Criminal Code, 
190S, C. 17, 
Sec. 10361. 

R. S. 1905, C. 17, 
Sec. 10418. 

R. S. 1910, Div. 

4, C. 2, Sec. 

2194. 

R. S. 1910, Div. 

4, C. 5, Sec. 

3177- 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE GAINED FOR 



63 



Oklahoma 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 



Rhode Island 
South Carolina 
South Dakota 

Tennessee 



Texas 



Utah 
Virginia 



Order to be obtained from court 
sentencing prisoners for removal of 
those suffering from contagious dis- 
ease to isolation hospital. 

County commissioners to inspect as 
to health of jail prisoners. 

Keeper to supply county convicts 
with necessary medical aid. 

State — Prison physician to visit 
every prisoner twice weekly ; to ex- 
amine into mental condition of all 
prisoners and when he believes the 
mind of the prisoner to be affected by 
discipline to recommend modifications. 
To give directions for health and clean- 
liness of prisoners and recommend 
changes in diet when necessary. 

In counties of from 5,000 to 800,000 
inhabitants salary of jail physician to 
he $1,800 per annum. 

Prison physician to be appointed by 
board. 

Prison physician to inspect all state 
prisoners and report to Governor. 

Prison physician to be appointed by 
board. 

Grand jury of each county respon- 
sible for health of convicts. 

From November 15th to March 15th 
to visit prison at 7 A. M. each day and 
examine physical condition of convicts 
and report on their ability to work. 
If unable to work he shall direct that 
they be returned to their cells or the 
hospital. From March 15th to Novem- 
ber 15th he shall visit prison at 6.30 
A. M. for same purpose. 

Prison physician to visit penitentiary 
daily and examine health of convicts ; 
he may employ nurses with the ap- 
proval of the assistant superintendent 
in cases of serious illness or epidemics ; 
in charge of sanitary regulation of 
prison and to see all precautions are 
taken to keep the prison healthy and 
to prevent contagious disease. 

County commissioners responsible 
that prisoners be kept in a healthy con- 
dition. 

Prison physician to examine all cells 
weekly and report as to cleanliness. 

Prison physician to see that convicts 
take the exercise necessary to main- 
tain their health. 

County commissioners to provide 
suitable medical aid for convicts. 

(315) 



R. S. 1910, Div. 
5, C. ir, Sec. 
4444. 

R. S. igo3. Sec. 

5715- 
R. S. 1910, Sec. 

4534- 
R. S. 1903, Page 
3493, Sec. 42. 



R. S. 1903, Page 
880, Sec. 26. 

R. S. 1909, Title 

38, C. 360, Sec. 

15- 
Criminal Code, 

igo2. Title 3, 

C. 33, Sec. 688. 
R. S. 1910, Title 

12, C. I, Sec. 

676. 
R. S. 1910, C. 5, 

Sec. 762. 
R. S. 1896, Title 

7, C. 2, Art. 2, 

Sec. 7506. 



R. S. 1897, Title 
79, C. 4, Sees. 
3681-6. 



R. S. 1911, Title 
61, Art. 3135. 

R. S. 1907, Title 

74, Sec. 2234. 
R. S. 1904, Title 

55, C. 202, Sec. 

4129. 
R. S. 1904, C. 43, 

Sec. 928. 



64 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Washington Superior judges to make rules as to 

employment of medical and surgical 
aid for county convicts. 

West Virginia County convicts to have necessary 

medical attention. 

Wisconsin Proper medical care for sick pris- 

oner in state prison. 

County to supply proper medical aid 
for sick prisoners. 

Wyoming Sheriff to furnish medical attention 

for jail prisoners. 



R. S. 1910, 
Sec. 84Qv 



C. I, 



R. S. 1906, C. 41, 

Sec. 1342. 
R. S. 1898, C. 

201, Sec. 4904. 
R. S. 1898. C. 

202, Sec. 4954. 
R. S. 1910, C. 86, 

Sec. 1091. 



2. Religious ieaching is provided under certain limitations 



Alabama The prison chaplain to give entire 

time to work with the convicts. 

Convicts to be provided with Bibles. 

Arizona Two chaplains of different religious 

beliefs to give as much instruction to 
convicts as employment, etc., permits, 
and to ha\''e access at all times to the 
convicts. 

Arkansas Prison chaplain to hoUl religious 

services at least weekly. 

Colorado Prison chaplain to perform duties 

prescribed by commissioners. 

Connecticut Prison chaplain to give entire time 

to work with convicts. 

Sunday-school to be conducted in the 
prison. 

Illinois Prison chaplain to visit convicts in 

their cells and give moral instruction. 

Each convict to be furnished with a 
Bible. 

Iowa Prison chaplain to have access to con- 

victs at all seasonable times. 

Kansas Prison chaplain to preach every Sun- 

day and to use best interests to pro- 
mote the religious and moral welfare 
of the convicts. 

Kentucky Prison chaplain to give full time to 

work with convicts. 

Louisiana Prison chaplain to have access to the 

prisoners at all times. 

Maine $?o appropriation annually for Sun- 

dav-school at which jiersons from out- 
side the prison may assist. 

Prison chaplain to hold divine ser- 
vice each Sunday. 

Maryland To hold divine service at which war- 

den or assistant warden and all the 
convicts shall be jiresent unless pre- 
vented by sickness. 

Massachusetts Sunday-school to be conducted by 

such instructors as board deems ad- 
visable. 

Michigan Prison chaplain to furnish each con- 

vict with a bible and to visit sick. 

(316) 



R. S. 1907, C. 

191, Sec. 6503. 
R. S. 1907, C. 
191, Sec. 6539. 
R. S. 190 1,' Title 

56, Sec. 3576. 



R. S. 1904, C. 

123, Sec. 5892. 
R. S. 1908, C. 

ig8. Sees. 4860- 

4862. 
R. S. 1902, C. 

176, Sec. 2911. 
R. S. 1902, C. 

176, Sec. 2911. 
R. S. 1909, Page 

1670, Sec. 23. 
R. S. 1909, Page 

1670, Sec. 23. 
R. S. 1897, Title 

26, C. 2. Sec. 

5671- 
R. S. 1909. C. 

108, Sec. 8=;77. 



R. S. 1908, C. 97. 

Sec. 3803. 
Acts of 1900, No. 

70, Sec. 7. 
R. S. 1903. C. 

141. Sec. 50. 

R. S. 1903, C. 

141, Sec. 50. 
R. S. 1904. Art. 

27. Sec. 635. 



R. S. 1902. C. 
225, Sec. 73. 

R. S. 1897. Sec. 
2097. 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



6S 



Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Nevada 

New Hampshire 
New Jersey 

New Mexico 
New York 
North Carolina 
North Dakota 

Ohio 

Oklahoma 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode Island 

South Carolina 
Tennessee 

Texas 



Jail prisoners to be provided with 
Bibles at expense of county. 

Any minister willing to conduct ser- 
vice for jail prisoners has permission 
to do so. 

Prison chaplain to visit each of the 
convict farms at least once a month ; 
to hold Sunday services at penitentiary 
in the morning for the whites and in 
the afternoon for the blacks. 

All clergymen of the City of Jeffer- 
son to have free access to the convicts 
at all times in accordance with prison 
discipline. 

Divine service each Sunday ; expense 
not to exceed $520 per year. 

Commissioners to furnish Bibles and 
other books they deem necessary. 

Suitable religious instruction to be 
provided. 

Prisoners to be furnished the Bibles 
and such other books as keeper deems 
necessary, and to receive religious in- 
struction from competent persons. 

Prison chaplain appointed by gov- 
ernor. 

Prison chaplain to attend to spiritual 
wants of prisoners. 

$50 appropriation annually for Sun- 
day-school. 

Warden to employ resident clergymen 
of Bismarck to officiate in turn ; com- 
pensation $5.00 per week. 

$400 appropriation for religious ser- 
vices and library at penitentiary. 

Warden to furnish each convict with 
a Bible. 

Convicts to be supplied with Bibles. 

Chaplain whose salary shall be $900 
per year. 

Eastern Penitentiary — Moral in- 
structor. 

Western Penitentiary — Non-sectarian 
religious services. 

Prison chaplain to perform religious 
services and act as agent for procur- 
ing employment for prisoners on re- 
lease. 

Prison chaplain to give religious in- 
struction to prisoners. 

Sunday-school at reformatory. 

Religious services on Sunday. 



Bibles and other moral books to be 
furnished to convicts. 

Religious services at prisons, farms 
and camps ; prisoners to attend at least 
two such services per month. 

(317) 



R. S. 1905, C. 

106, Sec. 5477. 

R. S. 1905, C. 

106, Sec. 5477. 

R. S. 1908, C. 

107, Sec. 3598. 



R. S. 1909, C. 19, 
Art. I, Sec. 
1664. 

R. S. 19 1 2, Sec. 

7576. 
R. S. 1912, Sec. 

7576. 
R. S. 1901, Title 

35, C. 285, Sec. 

24. 
R. S. 1910, Page 

4910, Art. 3. 



R. S. 1897, Sec. 

3547- 
R. S. 1909, C. 47, 

Sec. 292. 
R. S. 1908, C. 

116, Sec. 5405. 
R. S. 1905, Sec. 

10352. 

Acts of 1910, H. 

B., No. 536. 
R. S. 1910, Sec. 

2185. 
R. S. 1903, Art. 

23, Sec. 5720. 
Laws of 1909, C. 

31- 

R. S. 1903, Page 
3497, Sec. 58. 

R. S. 1903, Page 
3497, Sec. 59. 

R. S. 1909, C. 
360, Sec. 15. 



R. S. 1912, Sees. 
960-961. 

R. S. 1896, Title 
7, Art. 4, Sec. 
7530. 

R. S. 1896, Title 
7, Art. 4, Sees. 

R. S. 191 1, Sec. 
6204. 



66 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Utah Religious services as board deems 

wise. 
Vermont Prison chaplain appointed by board. 

Washington Prison chaplain appointed by gov- 

ernor. 

Wisconsin Both Protestant and Catholic chap- 

lains. 

Wyoming Prison chaplain to have charge of 

moral welfare of the prisoners. 



R. S. 1907, C. 10, 

Sec. 2264. 
R. S. 1906, Title 

30, C. 260, Sec. 

5993- 
R. S. 1910, Title 

78, C. 2, Sec. 

8532. 
R. S. 1898, C. 

201, Sec. 4905. 
R. S. 1910, C. 41, 

Sec. 528. 



(a) Good conduct aw 
(A) When permitted 
Alabama By o r d e r of 

Governor. 

2 mos. from 
each of ist 2 
years. 

3 mos. from 
each of next 2 
years. 

4 mos. from 
each of next 2 
years. 

5 mos. from 
each of next 2 
years. 

6 mos. from 
each year after 
the 8th. If sen- 
tence is less than 
2 years and more 
than 6 mos. pro 
rata deduction. 
No d e d u ct i o n 
when sentence is 
under 6 mos. 

Arizona 2 mos. from 

each of ist 2 
years. 

4 mos. from 
each of next 2 
years. 

5 mos. from 
remaining years. 

Similar deduc- 
tions in Cali- 
fornia and Ore- 
gon, 
Arkansas i mo, from ist 



3. Moral Education, 
'arded by reduction of the time of confinement. 
(B) When forfeited: 



from 



year. 

2 mos. 
2nd year. 

3 mos. from 
3rd to lothyears. 

6 mos. from 
succeeding years. 



R. S. 
1907, 
Sec. 
7514. 



R. S. 

1901, 
Title 56, 
C, 2, Sec, 

3589. 



R, S. 

19045 

Sec. 

5904- 



Alabama 



Arkansas 



Convict con- 
victed a second 
time for crmie in- 
volving moral 
turpitude; con- 
vict who escapes. 



Convict who 
escapes or at- 
tempts escape 
forfeits all good 
time. Convict 
violating prison 
rules so as to be 
corrected three 
times forfeits all 
good time. 



R. S, 

1907, 
Sec. 
7514- 



Convict as- 


R, S, 


saulting fellow 


1901, 


convict, guard, 


Sec. 


etc. 


3589. 



R. S. 
1904, 
Sec. 
5905. 



(318) 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



67 



(A) When permitted 
California 2 mos. from 
each of ist 2 
years. 

4 mos. from 
each of next 2 
years. 

5 mos. from re- 
maining years. 

Similar provis- 
ions in Arizona 
and Oregon. 

County con- 
victs 5 days per 
mo. 



Colorado i mo. from ist 

year. 

2 mos. from 
2nd year. 

3 mos. from 
3rd year. 

4 mos. from 
4th year. 

5 mos. from 
5lh year. 

6 mos. from 
succeeding years. 

Similar provis- 
ions in Idaho 
and New Mex- 
ico. 

Extra deduc- 
tion for convicts 
engaged in road 
work, conditioned 
ongood behavior 
and cheerful 
compliance with 
all rules. 
Connecticut 60 days from 
each of ist 5 
years if sentence 
be 5 years or less. 

90 days from 
each year if sen- 
tence be over 5 
years. 

County con- 
victs. 5 days 
from each mo. if 
sentence is over 
3 mos. 
Delaware 5 days from 
each month dur- 
ing 1st year. 

7 days from 
each month from 
2nd year. 

9 days from 
each month 3rd 
year. 



Penal 
Code 
1909, 

Sec. 



R. S. 
1909, 
Sec. 
1614. 
R. S. 
1908, 
C. 108, 
Sec. 
4871. 



Laws of 
1905, 
S. B. 
224. 



R. S. 
1902, 
Sec. 
2900. 



R. S. 
1902, 
Sec. 
2956. 

Acts of 

1898, 

C. 247. 



(B) When forfeited : 
California Convict who 
violates p r i son 
rules, assaults 
guard, fellow 
convict etc. shall 
forfeit such por- 
tion of gain time 
as Board directs. 



Colorado 



Convict w h 
violates rules. 



Connecticut Loss of all or 
part of time for 
refusal to con- 
form with regu- 
lations. This 
provision does 
not apply when 
sentence is less 
than one year. 



Delaware 



For every vio- 
lation of rules 
convict forfeits 
all gained time. 



Penal 

Code 

1909, 

Sec. 

1588. 



R. S. 
1908, 
Sec. 
4872. 



R. S. 
1902, 
Sec. 
2900. 



R. S. 

1898, 
C. 247. 
Sec. 5. 



(319) 



68 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. 



(A) When permitted 




(B) When forfeited: 




lo days from 








each month each 








succeeding year. 








Florida 2 days from 


R. S. 


Florida Violation f 


R. S. 


1st mo. 


1906, 


rules causes for- 


4140. 


13 days from 


Title 4, 


feiture of gain 




1st 3 mos. 


Art. 6, 


time. 




25 days from 


Sec. 






1st 6 mos. 


4140. 






I mo. and 3 








days from ist 8 








mos. 








I mo. and 21 








days from each 








year. 








Georgia 2 mos. from 


R. S. 


Georgia Only applied 


Sec. 


2nd year. 


1911, 


to convicts not 


I22I. 


3 mos. from 


Sec. 


sentenced f r 




each year until 


1221. 


life and who ob- 




the loth. 




serve rules. 




4 mos. from 








remaining years. 








County con- 


R. S. 






victs 4 days from 


1911, 






each month. 


Sec. 
1 1 79. 






Idaho i mo. from ist 


R. S. 


Idaho Convict who 


R. S. 


year. 


1908, 


escapes, attempts 


1908, 


2 mos. from 


Sec. 


escape, or injures 


Sec. 


2nd year. 


8504. 


guard forfeits all 


8504. 


3 mos. from 




good time. 




3rd year. 








4 mos. from 








4th year. 








5 mos. from 








5th year. 








6 mos. from 








succeeding years. 








Similar deduc- 








tions in Colorado 








and New Mexico. 








Illinois i mo. from ist 


R. S. 


Illinois For ist viola- 


R. S. 


year. 


1909, 


tion of rules con- 


1909, 


2 mos. from 


C. 108, 


vict forfeits 2 


C. 108, 


2nd year. 


Sec. 45. 


days; for second 


Sec. 46. 


3 mos. from 




offense 4 days; 




3rd year. 




for third eight 




4 mos. from 




days; for fourth 




4th year. 




sixteen days; for 




5 mos. from 




more than 4 of- 




5th year. 




fenses warden 




6 mos. from 




may deprive him 




succeeding years. 




of such portion 
as he deems wise; 
convict also for- 
feits number of 
days he is in 
punishment. 





(320) 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



69 



(A) When permitted : 

1 mo. from 1st 
year. 

2 mos. from 
2nd year. 

3 mos. from 
3rd year. 

4 mos. from 
4th year. 

5 mos. from 
5th year. 

5 mos. from 



5th to 2 1 St years. 



1 mo. from 1st 
year. 

2 mos. 
2nd year. 

3 mos. 
3rd year. 

4 mos. 
4th year. 

5 mos. 
5th year. 

6 mos. 
6th to 25th years. 

Similar pro- 
visions in Mon- 
tana, Wisconsin, 
Wyoming. 

3 days 
from 



from 
from 
from 
from 
from 



mo. 
year 
6 
mo. 
year 



each 
1st 



days 
from 



each 
2nd 



days each 
mo. during re- 
mainder of sen- 
tence. 

7 days from 
each mo. 

Similar pro- 
visions in Maine. 

Board of con- 
trol to make 
rules for commu- 
tation of sen- 
tences. 

Yz commuta- 
tion to second 
termers; none to 
third termers. 

Jail prisoners 
one-sixth of sen- 
tences. 



R. S. 
1908, 
Sec. 
9886, 



(B) 



R. S. 
1897, 
Title 26, 
C. 2, 
Sec. 
5703- 



R. S. 
1909, 
Sec. 
8";8i. 



R. S. 

1909, 

C. 97, 

Sec. 

3801. 

R. S. 

1908, 

page 623, 

Sec. 6. 



R. S. 

1908, 

page 623, 

Sec. 6. 



Indiana 



Iowa 



Kansas 



When forfeited : 
For 1st offense 
2 days; for 2nd 
4 days; 3rd 8 
days; 4th 16 
days; and for 
more than 4 of- 
fenses warden 
may use judg- 
ment. If first 
offenses are seri- 
ous warden may 
deprive him of 
more than time 
specified. 

1st offense 2 
days; 2d offense 
4 days; 3rd of- 
fense 8 days; 4th 
offense 16 days. 
In addition 
thereto days he 
is inpunishment. 
For more than 4 
offenses warden, 
with approval of 
governor, may 
use judgment as 
to depriving him 
of all or part of 
gain time. 

All or part of 
good time. 



R. S. 

1908, 

C. 124, 

Sec. 



R. S. 
1897, 
Title 26, 
C. 2, 
Sec. 
5704- 



R. S. 

1909, 
C. 108, 
Art. 30, 

Sec. 

8581. 



(321) 



70 



THE CAGED MAN 



(A) When permitted : 



(B) When forfeited 



Maine 



Maryland 



Massachu- 
setts 



Michigan 



Minnesota 



7 days from 
each month. 
Does not apply 
to life prisoners. 

Similar provi- 
sions in Ken- 
tucky. 

5 days from 
each mo. 



I day per mo. 
if sentence be 4 
mos. and less 
than I year. 

3 days per mo. 
from 1st to 3rd 
years. 

4 days per mo. 
from 3rd to 5th 
years, 

5 days per mo. 
from 5th to lOth 
years. 

6 days per mo. 
from succeeding 
years. 

5 days per mo. 
from 1st 2 yrs. 

6 days per mo. 
from 2nd 2 yrs. 

7 days per mo. 
from 3rd 2 yrs. 

9 days per mo. 
from 7th, 8th and 
9th yrs. 

10 days per 
mo. from loth to 
14th yrs. 

12 days per 
mo. from 15th to 
19th yrs. 

15 days per 
mo. from suc- 
ceeding yrs. 

5 days per mo. 
during 1st yr. 

7 days per mo. 
during 2nd yr. 

9 days per mo. 
during 3rd yr. 

10 days per 
mo. during re- 
mainder of sen- 
tence. 



R. S. 

1903, 
C. 141, 
Sec. 15. 



R. S. 

1904, 

Art. 27, 

Sec. 474. 



R. S. 

1902, 
C. 225, 
Sec. 113. 



R. S. 
1897, 

C. 75. 
Sec. 33. 



R. S. 

1905, 

C. 105, 

Sec. 
5445- 



Maryland 



Massachu- 
setts. 



All good time 
in mos. delm- 
quency accrues 
to be forfeited; 
according to na- 
ture of offense, 
board may de- 
duct good time. 

Forfeiture for 
violation of rules. 



R. S. 

1904, 

Art. 27. 

Sec. 474. 



R. S. 

1902, 

C. 225, 

Sec. 113. 



Michigan For violation R. S. 



of rules or at 

'"•"" - C.75 



ui 1 uics ui ui- 18971 

tempt to escape. C. 75, 
Sec. 33. 



Minnesota Only granted R. S. 

if convict passed 1909, 

entire time with- C. 105, 

out violation of Sec. 

rules. 5445. 



(322) 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



71 





(A.) When permitted 




(B) When forfeitel: 




Mississippi 


For efficient 
service, board 
may allow county 
convicts 3^ time. 


R. S. 

1905, 

C. 22, 

Sec. 842. 






Missouri 


Convict serv- 
ing ^4 of time in 
exemplary man- 
ner shall be dis- 
charged in same 
manner as if he 
had been par- 
doned. In such 
cases no pardon 
from the Gover- 
nor is necessary. 


R. S. 
19C9, 
Art. 19, 
Sec, 
1656. 






Montana 


I mo. from ist 


R. S. 


Montana Good time 


R. S. 




year. 


1907, 


conditioned n 


1907, 




2 mos. from 


Sec. 


good behavior 


Sec. 




2nd year. 


9737- 


and regular labor 


9737- 




3 mos. from 




during good 






3rd year. 




health. 






4 mos. from 










4th year. 










5 mos. from 










Sth year. 










6 mos. from 










6th to 25th year. 










Similar provi- 










sions m Iowa, 










Wisconsin and 










Wyoming. 








Nebraska 


2 mos. from 


R. S. 


Nebraska Good time 


R. S. 




1st and 2nd 


1911, 


conditioned n 


1911, 




years. 


Sec. 


good conduct 


Sees. 




3 mos. from 


2737- 


and faithful, or- 


2737-8 




3rd year. 




derly and peace- 






4 mos. from 




ful performance 






succeedingyears. 




of duties; mis- 






Similar provi- 




conduct can 






sions in Nevada. 




cause loss of 75 
per cent, of time 
gained. 




Nevada 


2 mos. from 


R. S. 


! Nevada Forfeited by 


Sec. 




1st and 2nd 


1912, 


assault on keeper 


7581. 




years. 


Sec. 


or other viola- 






3 mos. from 


7581. 


tion of rules. 






3rd year. 










4 mos. from 










succeedingyears. 










Similar provi- 










s i n s in Ne- 










braska. 










Additional de- 


Laws of 








duction of 10 


1911, 








days each mo. for 


C. 71. 








good conduct on 










road work. 










County con- 


R. S. 








victs allowed de- 


1912, 








duction of 5 days 


Sec. 








for each mo. 


7622. 







(323) 



72 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(A) When permitted : 



(B) When forfeited: 



New Hamp- I day per mo. 


R. S. 






SHIRE if sentence be 2 


1901, 






years or less. 


C. 285. 






2 days per mo. 


Sec. 14. 






if sentence be 3 








years. 








3 days per mo. 








if sentence be 4 








years. 








4 days per mo. 








if sentence be 5 








years. 








5 days per mo. 








if sentence be 








from 5 to 7 years. 








6 days per mo. 








if sentence be 








from 6 to 10 








years. 








7 days per mo. 


1 






if sentence be 








from 10 to 15 








years. 








8 days per mo. 








if sentence be 








from 15 to 20 








years. 








10 days per 








mo. for any other 








time but life im- 








prisonment. 








New Jersey 2 days for each 


R. S. 


New Jersey For flagrant 


R. S. 


mo. of faithfully 


1910, 


misconduct. In- 


1910, 


performed labor. 


Page 


spectors may de- 


Page 


2 days for each 


4916, 


clare a forfeiture 


4916, 


mo. of orderly 


Art. 10. 


of the whole or 


Sec. 10 


deportment. 




part of time pre- 




2 days for each 




viously gained. 




mo. of manifest 








effort at intellect- 








ual improvement 








to be certified by 








moral instructor. 








Add i t lonal 


R. S. 






good time of i 


1891, 






day per mo. for 


Page 






1st year of good 


498, 






conduct. 


Art. 2. 






For each suc- 








ceeding year of 








good conduct 








commutation to 








increase progres- 








sively one day 








per mo. 








New Mexico i mo. from ist 


R. S. 


New Mexico Good time de- 


R. S. 


year. 


1897, 


pendent on good 


1897, 


2 mos. from 


Sec. 


conduct through 


Sec. 


2nd year. 


3536. 


whole time of 


3536- 


3 mos. from 




sentence and 




3rd year. 




final pardon by 
governor. 





(324) 



No. 4] 



HO IV IS HE CARED FOR 



73 



(A) When permitted : 

4 mos. from 
4th year. 

5 mos. from 
5th year. 

6 mos. from 
succeeding years. 

Similar provis- 
ions in Colorado 
and Idaho. 
New York 5 days per mo. Laws of 
if sentence be 191 2, 

less than i year. Cha. 79. 

2 mos. from 
island 2nd years. 

4 mos. from 
3d and 4th years. 

5 mos. from 
each subsequent 
year. 

Applicable to 

convicts confined 

under d eti nite 

sentences, when 

term equals 6 

mos.; not appli- 
cable to life sen- 
tences. 
North 5 days for each 

Carolina mo.; for every 

10 days thus 

earned further 

reward of Si-oo; 

for every $5.00 

thus earned 

further d e d u c - 

tion of 5 days. 
North 2 mos. from 

Dakota ist to 3rd years. 
75 days from 

3rd to 5th year. 

3 mos. from 
5th to 7th year. 

105 days from 
7th to nth year. 

4 mos. each 
year during re 
mainder of sen- 
tence. 

Further com- 
mutation, at dis- 
cretion of Gov- 
ernor, upon 
recommendation 
in writing by 
board of trustees, 
may be allowed 
to convict who 
surpasses the 
average inmates 
in diligence 1 n 
study or labor or 
in good behavior 
or otherwise. 



(B) When forfeited : 



R. S. 
1908, 
C. 116, 
Sec. 
5402. 



R. S. 

1905, 
C. 17, 
Art. 6. 



R. S. 

1905, 
C. 17, 
Art. 6. 



North 
Carolina 



North 
Dakota 



Convict as- 
saulting prison 
officer or taking 
part in msurrec- 
tion or attempt- 
ing escape for- 
feits all good 
time. 

For infraction 
of rules convict 
may be deprived 
of gain time. 



R. S. 

1908, 

C. 1x6, 

Sec. 
5402. 



R. S. 

1905, 
Art. 6, 
C. 17. 



(325) 



74 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



of 

from 
of 2 

from 
of 3 

from 
of 4 



(A) When permitted : 
Ohio 5 days from R. S. 

sentence of i 1910, 
year. C. 2, 

6 days from Sec. 

sentence of 2 2163. 
years. 

8 days 
sentence 
years. 

9 days 
sentence 
years. 

10 days from 
sentence of 5 
years. 

11 days from 
sentence of 6 or 
more years. 

If sentence be 
mos. or fraction 
of a year the de- 
duction as pro- 
vided for year 
next higher than 
maximum sen- 
tence. 
Oregon 2 mos. from 

each of 1st 2 
years. 

4 mos. from 
each of next 2 
years. 

5 mos. from 
remaining years. 

Similar provi- 
sions in Arizona 
and California. 

Life prisoners 
who have earned 
73 of time during 
first 5 years, ^ 
of time during 
second 5 years, 
% of time during 
third 5 years may 
be pardoned by 
the Governor at 
the end of 15 
years. 
Pennsyl- I day from ist R. S. 

VAMA month; 2 addi- 1907, 

tional days from Page 
2nd mo.; 3 addi- 3496, 

tional days from Sec. 54. 
each succeeding 
month of first 
year. 4 days per 
mo. from 2nd to 
I o t h years ; 2 
days per mo. 
from succeeding 
years. 



(B) 



R. S. 
1910, 
C. 13, 
Sec. 
4510. 



R. S. 
1910, 
C. 13, 

Sec. 

4514- 



Ohio 



Oregon 



Pennsyl- 
vania 



When forfeited : 
Commutati o n 
dependent on en- 
tire time being 
passed without 
violation of rules. 



For infraction 
of rules inspect- 
ors may strike off 
who'e or part of 
gain time. 



R. S. 

1 9 ID, 
C. 2, 

Sec. 
2163. 



All credits may 


R. S. 


be forfeited in 


1910 


case of failure to 


Sec. 


work. 


4516 


M i s c n duct 


R. S 


forfeits all good 


1910 


time earned pre- 


Sec. 


viously. 


4512 



R. S. 
1907, 
Page 
3486, 
Sec. 54. 



(325) 



No- 4] 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



75 





(A) When permitted 




(B 


Rhode 


For I mo. of 


R. s. ! 


Rhode 


Island 


good behavior 


1909. ; 


Island 




Governor, upon 


C. 360, 1 






recommendation 


Sec. 31. 






of Board, may 








deduct number 








of days there are 








years in sen- 








tence, provided 








that if sentence 








be over 5 years, 








only 5 days shall 








be deducted 








from the month. 






South 


2 mos. from 


R. S. 


South 


Dakota 


1st to 3rd years. 


1910, 


Dakota 




3rd yr. 3 mos. 


Sec. 






4th to loth yrs. 


686. 






4 mos.; loth to 








20th yrs. 5 mos.; 








succeeding years 








6 mos. 






Tennessee 


I mo. from 1st 


R. S. 


Tennessee 




year. 


1896, 






2 mos. from 


Title 7, 






2nd year. 


Art. 2, 






3 mos. from 


Sec. 






each subsequent 


7482. 






year until the 








loth. 








4 mos. from 








each remaining 








year. 








County con- 


R. S. 






victs — Deduc- 


1896, 






tion at discretion 


Sec. 






of Board of 


7423- 






County Commis- 








sioners. 




! 


Utah 


15 days from 


R. S. 


Utah 




sentence of 3 


1907. 






mos. 


Sec. 


! 




30 days from 


1686, ' 


' 




sentence of 6 


X. 14. 






mos. 




1 




2 mos. from i 








year. 








3 mos. from 2 








years. 








4 mos. from 3 








years. 








5 mos. from 4 








years. 








6 mos. from 5 








years. 








From all time 








in excess of 5 








years half-time 








shall be de- 








ducted. 







When forfeited : 
Every day con- 
vict is shut up or 
punished one 
day is deducted 
from good time. 



For infraction 
of rules good 
tune is forfeited. 



For any infrac- 
tion of rules con- 
vict may be de- 
prived of all or 
any portion of 
good time. 



R. S. 

1909, 
C. 360, 
Sec. 31. 



S. 



R 

1910, 
Sec. 
686. 



Good time de- 


R. S. 


pendent on 
proper demeanor. 


1896, 
Title 7, 
Art. 2, 




Sec. 


If prisoner 


7482. 
R. S. 


escapes he for- 
feits all good 


1896, 
Title 7, 


fime. 


Art. 2, 




Sec. 




7423- 



R. S. 

1907, 

Title 57, 

Sec. 

1686, 

X. 16. 



(327) 



7^ 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Vermont 



Virginia 



(A) When permitted 
5 days from 
each mo. of good 
conduct. 



4 days from 
each mo. of good 
conduct, with ap- 
proval of Gov- 
ernor. 

County con- 
victs 4 days al 
lowed for each 
mo. of good con- 
duct on road or 
quarry force. 
Washington 2 mos. from 
1st 2 years. 

4 mos. from 
next to 2 years. 

5 mos. from 
succeeding years. 

Wisconsin i mo. from 1st 
year. 

2 mos. from 
2nd year. 

3 mos. from 
3rd year. 

4 mos. from 
4th year. 

5 mos. from 
5th year. 

6 mos. from 
6th to 25th year. 

Similar provis- 
ions in Iowa, 
Montana and 
W'yoming. 
Wyoming i mo. from ist 

year. 

2 mos. from 
2nd year. 

3 mos. from 
3rd year. 

4 mos. from 
4th year. 

5 mos. from 
5th year. 

6 mos. from 
6th to 25th year. 

Similar provis- 
ions in Iowa, 
Montana, Wis- 
consin. 

Pro rata for 
part of a year. 



R. S. 

1906, 
C. 261, 

Sec. 

6088, 

R. S. 

1904, 
Title 55, 

Sec. 

4144. 
Laws of 

1910, 
C. 217. 



R. S. 
191Q, 
Sec. 
8521. 



R. S. 
1889, 
Sec. 
4928. 



R. S. 

1910, 

C. 41, 

Sec. 
522. 



(B) When forfeited : 
Vermont Good time re- 

duced five days 
for each mo. in 
which convict 
misbehaves. 



Washington For violation 
of rules. 



Wisconsin 



Forfeiture of 
5 days for ist of- 
fense; 10 days 
for 2nd offense; 
20 days for sub- 
sequent offenses. 



Wyoming 



For violation 
of rules. 



R. S. 
1906, 
C. 261, 
Sec. 
6088. 



R. S. 
1904, 
Sec. 
8521. 



R. S. 

1889, 
Sec. 
4928. 



R. S. 
1910, 

C. 41. 

Sees. 

523-4- 



(32^) 



No. 4l 



HO W IS HE CARED FOR 



77 



(^) Good conduct is rewarded by special favor. 



Arkansas 



Maryland 



(A) When permitted 
Tobacco not 
exceeding one 
pound per 
month. 

Good conduct 
to be reporterl 
officially to the 
Board. Not to 
include hope of 
pardon. 



New Hamp- 
shire 



Ohio 



Pennsyl- 
vania 



South 
Dakota 

Tennessee 



Warden, with 
consent of gover- 
nor and council, 
may offer suit- 
able encourage- 
ment and indul- 
gences to con- 
victs distinguish- 
ing themselves 
by obedience, in- 
dustry and faith- 
fulness. 

Board of Man- 
agers of Reform- 
atory to arrange a 
system of marks 
or otherwise to 
determine credit 
earned by pris- 
oner, as to in- 
creased p r i V i- 
leges or release 
from control. 
Prisoner to learn 
standing once a 
month. 

Tobacco to a 
limited extent. 



Moderate al- 
lowance of tea 
or tobacco. 

Moderate 
amount of chew- 
ing tobacco to 
convicts accus- 
tomed to use of 
same. 



R. S. 
1904, 
Sec. 
5920. 

R. S. 

1904, 
Art. 27, 
Sec. 593. 



R. S. 

1901, 
C. 285. 
Sec. 15. 



R. S. 
1 9 10, 
Sec. 
2159. 



R. S. 
1907, 
Page 

3494. 
Sec. 45. 

R. S. 
1910, 

Sec. 676. 

R. S. 

1896, 

Title 7, 

Art. 4, 

Sec. 



7534- 



(B) When forfeited ; 



Nevada 



Loss of out- 
door privilege is 
the maximum 
punishment for 
prisoners em- 
ployed on road 
work 



Laws of 
1911, 
C. 71. 



(329) 



7S 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(A) When permitted : 
Wisconsin Moderate al- R. S. 
lowance of to- 1898, 
bacco or tea as a Sec. 

reward for in- 4902. 
dustry oi 
behavior. 



(B) When forfeited: 



(^) Prisoner's grading is the outward expression of his reported rating. 



Alabama 



California 



Idaho 



Illinois 



Louisiana 



(A) WTien allowed ; 
Convicts grad- 
ed when hired 
for mine work; 
grading permis- 
sible for other 
work. 

Warden to 
grade and class- 
ify convicts and 
clothe them so 
grades may be 
distinguishable. 

Prisoners to be 
divided into 
three grades. No 
one to be pa- 
roled until he has 
served 6 mos. in 
first grade. Pris- 
oners in second 
and third grades 
to be deprived of 
such privileges as 
Board directs. 

First class, cor- 
rigible, likely to 
observe the laws, 
and maintain 
them selves by 
honest industry 
after discharge; 
second class in- 
corrigible but 
competent to 
labor; third class 
incorrigible and 
so incompetent 
as to seriously in- 
terfere with the 
work and disci- 
pline of the pen- 
itentiary. 

Board to make 
rules for grading 
and classifying 
the prisoners ac- 
cording to most 
modern and en- 
lightened system 
of reformation. 



(B) When forfeited; 



R. S. 
1907, 
Sec. 
6530. 



Penal 
Code, 
1909, 
Sec. 

1578, 
P. 5. 
R. S. 
1908, 
Part 2, 
Title 10, 
Sec. 
8264. 



R. S. 

1909, 
C. 108, 
Sec. 78. 



Laws of 
1900, 

No. 70, 
Sec. 6. 



(330) 



Ko. 4j 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



79 



(A) When permitted ; 



(B) When forfeited ; 



Massachu- 


According to 


R. S. 






setts 


conduct, industry 
and diligence in 
study. 


1902, 
C. 225, 
Sec. 15. 






Michigan 


First class cor- 


R. S. 


Michigan Reduction to 


R. S. 




rigible; second 


1897, 


lower grade for 


1897. 




class incorrigible 


Sec. 


misconduct. 


C.75. 




but competent to 


2103. 




Sec. 24 




labor; third 










grade incorrigi- 










ble and incom- 










petent. 








Mississippi 


First class con- 
victs, male and 
female, over i8 
and under 55. 


R. S. 

1906, 

C. 22, 

Sec. 844. 






Nevada 


First grade, 
those appearing 
corrigible. Sec- 
ond grade, those 
appearing incor- 
rigible but com- 
petent to work. 
Third grade, 
those appearing 
incompetent and 
incorrigible. 
Garb of first 
grade, one color 
throughout. 
Garb of second 
grade, prison 
stripes. Garb of 
third grade, 
trousers of prison 
stripes and red 
shirts. 


R. S. 
1912, 
Sec. 
7583- 






New York 
Ohio 


First grade, 
corrigible and 
likely to observe 
laws. Second 
grade, incorrigi- 
ble, but compe- 
tent and not 
likely to interfere 
seriously with 
prison discipline. 
Third grade, in- 
corrigible and 
in com pe tent. 
Superintendent 
of state prisons 
to make promo- 
tions and reduc- 
tions from one 
grade to another. 

Grading for 
employment, etc. 


Prison 
Law, 
1909, 

c. 47, 

Sec. 
148-9. 

R. S. 
1910, 
Div. 4, 

C.2, 

Sec. 
2159. 







(331) 



8o 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(B) When forfeited : 



(A) When permitted : 

Texas Prison Com- R. S. 

mission to class- 191 1, 
ify all prisoners. C. 28, 
First class — first .Sec. 
offenders; sec- 1609. 
ond class — less 
corrigible but 
content to work; 
third class — ap- 
pearing incorri- 
gible. Prisoners 
to be promoted 
and reduced 
from one grade 
to another. Uni- 
forms of first two 
grades not 
stripes. Special 
privileges to dif- 
ferent grades. 

Utah Board to class- R. S. 

ify prisoners. IQO?) 
First grade — Title 74, 
those appearing C. 10, 
corrigible; sec- Sec. 

ond grade — in- 2242. 
corrigibles who 
are competent 
and not likely to 
interfere with 
productiveness of 
labor. Third 
grade — incorri- 
gibles and in- 
competents who 
will interfere 
with labor. Pro- 
motion and re- 
duction from one 
grade to another. 

Qc/) Reward of money wa'^e, the use of which is regulated so as to increase moral incentive. 



(A) When permitted: 
California County court Laws of 
may decree that 191 1, 
prisoners work C. 379. 
on roads; Board 
to allow wife or 
children or 
guardians of 
latter not exceed- 
ing $1.50 for 
each day's labor. 
Colorado^ '' Earnings, after R. S. 
cost of mamten- 1908, 

ance and reten- .Sec. 

tion is deducted, 4882. 
to be given to 
familyordepend- 
ents, or if there 
be nonesuch, ac- 
cumulated until 
time of discharge. 



(I) When forfeited; 



(332) 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



Illinois 



Kansas 



Kentucky 



(A) When permitted 




(B) When forfeited : 




County pris- 


Laws of 






oners, one-half 


1911, 






net earnings after 


C. 130. 






the deduction of 








expenses for 








guarding, to be 








paid dependents 








likely to become 








a public charge. 








In no case 


R. S. 


Illinois Violation of 


R. S. 


shall earnings 


1909, 


rules causes for- 


1909, 


exceed lo per 


C. 108, 


f e i t u r e of 50 


C. 108, 


cent, of the earn- 


Sec. 91. 


cents for each 


Sec. 91. 


ings of the peni- 




day of good time 




tentiary or re- 




lost. 




formatory. 








Earnings may be 








used for family 








or to purchase 








books, etc., and 








may be b e- 








queathed by will. 








Five per cent. 


R. S. 


Kansas For violation 


R. S. 


of each day's 


1909, 


of rules warden 


1909, 


earnings — earn- 


Sec. 


or directors may 


C. 108, 


ings being com- 


8588. 


forfeit the whole 


Art. 30, 


puted at 75 cents. 




or any part of 


Sec. 


R e f rmatory 


R. S. 


convict's earn- 


8588. 


prisoners, first 


1909, 


ings. 




grade 3 cents per 


Sec. 






day ; second 


8643. 






grade 2 cents per 








day. Earnings 








funded until re- 








lease. 








Convict may 


R. S. 






cause earnings, 


1909, 






in excess of earn- 


Sec. 






ings for one year. 


8589. 






to be sent to 








family or ex- 








pended in such 








way as warden 








approves. 








Board to place 


Laws of 


Kentucky Warden by 


Laws ot 


to credit of pris- 


1910, 


! way of punish- 


1910, 


oner such amount 


c. 15. 


ment with ap- 


c. 15. 


of average per 




proval of Board, 




capita earnings 




may cancel or 




as Board deems 




distribute to 




just — e a r n i n gs 




family such por- 




not to exceed 20 




tion of earnings 




per cent, of aver- 




as he deems best. 




age per capita 








earnings. Earn ■ 








ings may go to 








family or be paid 








prisoner, but 25 








per cent, must 








be funded until 








release. 









(^zzz) 



82 



Louisiana 



Maine 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(A) When permitted : 

Convicts on R. S. 

roads or farms; 1904, 

first class $5 to Page 

$15 per month; I3'3' 

second class $2 Sec. 8. 
to $10 per month. 

County pris- Laws o 
oners — Commis- 191 1) 
sioners send C. 144. 
order weekly 
upon treasury for 
number of days' 
work done by 
prisoner — earn- 
ings for family. 

Any person R. S. 
awaitmg sen- I903> 
tence in jail C. 82 
where labor is Sec. 4: 
provided shall re- 
ceive such sum as 
in the judgment 
of the county 
c o m m i ssioners 
he has earned. 



(B) When forfeited; 



Maryland 



Massachu- 
setts 



Mississippi 



Earnings of R. S. 

prisoner in 1904, 

House of Cor- Art. 27, 

rection may be Sec. 473. 
sent to family. 

In cases of de- Laws of 
sertion and non- 191 1, 
support,the court C. 456, 
imposing sen- Sec. 8. 
tence may if he 
finds destitution 
amongst the de- 
pendents order 
that 50 cents for 
each day's hard 
labor performed 
by the prisoner 
be paid for their 
relief. 

County con- R. S. 
victs; first class 1906, 
from S5 to S15 , C. 22, 
per month; sec- Sec. 845. 
ond class from 
$2 to $10 per 
month. Board 
may designate 
higher wages on 
account of the 
skill in individ- 
ual cases. 



(334) 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



83 



(A) When permitted 
Five per cent 
of daily earnings 
to be set aside at 
end of quarter; 
warden to keep 
accurate account 
of number o f 
days' work done 
by prisoner ; sum 
of $15 must ac- 
cumulate for 
each prisoner 
after release 
from penitentiary 
unless the 5 per 
cent amount to 
less; balance may 
be used for family, 
provided warden 
ascertains it is 
destitute, or for 
personal necessi- 
ties not provided 
by the institu- 
tion. All earn- 
ings of life pris- 
oners go to fam- 
ily ; gross earn- 
ings of life pris- 
oner without 
family go to in- 
stitution. 

Twenty-five 
cents a day to 
convicts engaged 
in road work. 

County c o n- 
victs at end of 
sentence receive 
25 per cent of 
amount of their 
labor; sheriff to 
keep itemized 
account showing 
earnings and ex- 
penses. 

Compensation 
not to exceed 10 
per cent of the 
earnings of the 
prison to be dis- 
tributed among 
the prisoners; 
agent and war- 
d e n to grade 
c o m p e n sation, 
basing it on pe- 
cuniary value of 
work and on 
willingness, in- 
dustry and good 
conduct. 



(B) When forfeited ; 



R. S. 

1909, 
Art. 19, 

Sees. 

1618-19- 

20. 



Laws of 
1911, 
C.71. 

R. S. 

1901, 
C. 283. 
Sec. 17. 



Prison 
Law 
1909, 
C.47. 
Art, 6, 
Sec. 185. 



Nevada 



Laws of 
1911, 
C. 71. 



New York 



When prisoner 
forfeits good 
time he forfeits 
50 cents per day. 



R. S. 
1909, 

C.43- 

Art. 9, 

Sec. 185. 



(335) 



84 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



North 
Carolina 



North ' 
Dakota 



Ohio 



(A) When permitted 

Earnings may 
be used for family 
or to buy books, 
instruments and 
instruction not 
supplied by insti- 
tution; they may 
not be used for 
food, clothing or 
ornament. 

One dollar al- 
lowed for every 
ten days of good 
time earned. 
Money may be 
sent to family if 
prisoner desires. 
Directors to 
make regulations 
for reasonable 
amount of money 
to be given con- 
vict as reward for 
good conduct. 

Money reward 
may be given 
convict who sur- 
passes the aver- 
age inmates in 
good behavior, 
diligence, in 
study, labor or 
otherwise, at dis- 
cretion of gover- 
nor, upon recom- 
mendation of 
Board of Trus- 
tees. 

Board may 
credit prisoners 
with such part of 
earnings, not ex- 
ceeding 20 per 
cent of receipts, 
as seems equit- 
able and just, 
taking into con- 
sideration char- 
acter and nature 
of crime and de- 
portment. Funds 
may be paid pris- 
oner or family, 
according to 
judgment of 
Board. At least 
25 per cent must 
be kept for pris- 
oner on release. 
Life prisoners re- 
ceive at most 5 
cents per day. 



(B) When forfeited: 



Prison 
Law 
1909, 

C. 47. 
Sec. 187. 



R. S. 

1908, 

C. 1x6, 

Sees. 
5402-3. 



R. S. 

190S. 
Sec. 
10358. 



R. S. 
1910, 
C. 2, 
Sec. 
2208. 



Ohio 



Board may use 
judgment as to 
cancelling earn- 
ings. 



R. S. 
1910, 
Sec. 
2164. 



(336) 



No. 4] 



HO W IS HE CARED FOR 



85 



Oregon 



(A) When permitted: 

Board of Man- Laws of 
agers of peniten- 191 1, 
tiary to which Sec. 

prisoner is sen- 13019. 
t e n c e d under 
Employers' Lia- 
bility Law to pay 
hmi 40 cents per 
working day dur- 
i n g period of 
confinement. 

Fifty cents per R. S. 
merit mark al- 19 10, 
lowed to each C. 4516. 
convict on dis- 
charge. 



(B) When forfeited ; 



Pennsyl- 
vania 



Rhode 

Island 



South 
Dakota 



Quarterly 
wages equal to 
amount of earn- 
ings, fixed from 
time to time by 
authorities, from 
which board, 
lodging and cost 
of trial shall be 
deducted. .Bal- 
ance paid depen- 
dents or funded 
until release. 

Board may, on 
discharge, pay 
convtct sum of 
money not ex- 
c e e d i n g one- 
tenth of his 
actual earnings; 
in case of sick- 
ness Board may 
also pay one- 
tenth average 
earnings of con- 
vict labor. In no 
case is sum to be 
less than $5.00. 

Money reward 
may be given 
convict who sur- 
passes the aver- 
age inmates in 
good behavior, 
diligence, in 
study, labor or 
otherwise, at dis- 
cretion of gover- 
nor, upon recom- 
mendation of 
Board of Trus- 
tees. 



R. S. 
1907, 
Page 

3487, 
Sec. 4. 



R. S. 

1909, 
C. 360, 
Sec. 42. 



R. S., 

1905, 

C. 17 

Sec. 699. 



Oregon 



Money credits 
subjected to for- 
feiture of the 
cost price of tools 
and materials 
which have been 
injured or wasted 
through careless- 
ness or neglect 
of convict. 



R. S. 
1910, 
Sec. 
4516. 



(337) 



86 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(A) When permitted : 



(B) When forfeited : 



Utah Unmarried 


R. S. 






prisoners not ex- 


1907, 






ceeding lo per 


Title 57, 






cent of earnings 


Sec. 






on discharge. 


2260. 






Married prison- 








ers not exceed- 








ing 25 per cent 








to go to families. 








If they have no 








dependents they 








are credited as 








unmarried. 








Vermont If poor and 


R. S. 


Vermont Loss of $1.00 


R. S. 


needy, prisoner 


1906, 


for each mo. in 


1906, 


to be paid on 


C. 261, 


which convict 


C. 261. 


discharge, $1 for 


Sec. 


commits misde- 


Sec. 


each day's work 


6088. 


meanor. 


60S8. 


during sentence. 








Payment not to 








exceed ^100. 








Wisconsin For extra good 


R. S. 






conduct Board 


1889, 






may allow money 


Sec. 






compensation. 


4942. 






Wyoming Prisoners in 


Laws of 


Wyoming Fines as a sub- 


Laws of 


the discretion of 


1911, 


stitute for pun- 


1911, 


the Commission 


C. 61. 


ishment, not to 


C. 61. 


receive a graded 




exceed 50 cents 




compensation, in 




a day. 




no case more 








than 10 per cent 








of earnings of in- 








stitution. Sur- 








plus earnings go 








to family, are 








never to be used 








in buying com- 








missary, but the 








balance paid on 








release subject to 








draft. 









Alabama 



{e') Reward of ivagt for overtime loork. 
(A) When permitted : (B) When forfeited: 

After perform- 



Delaware 



a n c e of daily 
task; manner 
p r e s c ribed by 
Board; proceeds 
disposed of as 
Board shall pro- 
vide by rule. 

Earnings may 
go to family, be 
used to purchase 
articles permitted 
in the prison, or 
be funded until 
discharge. 



Laws of 
1907, 
Sec. 
6531- 



Laws of 
1898, 

C. 247. 
Sec. 5. 



(338) 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



87 



(A) When permitted : 
Michigan Prisoners Laws of 

-working on pub- 1907, 
lie account may No. 291. 
receive wages not 
to exceed 10 per 
cent of the pro- 
fits realized upon 
actual collections 
from the sale of 
the product of 
the plant. 

Wages are Laws of 
paid convicts in 191 1, 
the wisdom of No. 239. 
the Board; a 
limit of 15 cents 
a day is set. 
Missouri Convict is R. S. 

tasked for rea- 1909, 
sonable amount Sec. 
and allowed 1623. 
wage for over- 
time at rate al- 
lowed state. If 
on any day con- 
vict cannot ac- 
complish full task 
no deduct ion 
shall be made 
from any over 
work performed 
on any other 
day. Overtime 
pay may be 
drawn for pur- 
chase of books, 
etc., to be pur- 
chased by war- 
den or chaplain 
at lowest cash 
price without 
commission. In- 
spectors may 
upon r e c o m- 
mendation of 
warden at end of 
each month place 
to credit of con- 
vict not guilty of 
m isd em eanor 
and who has lost 
no time during 
month such lim- 
ited amount as 
will encourage a 
more cheerful 
performance of 
work, subject to 
same rules as 
applied to over 
work. 



(B) When forfeited ; 



(339) 



88 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(A) When permitted : 
Virginia Convicts to be R. S. 

tasked; a reason- 1904, 
able amount, de- Title 55, 
termined by su- Sec. 
perintendent, to 4173. 
be paid on dis- 
charge, or to 
family, or to be 
used for provis- 
ions and other 
articles selected 
from a standing 
list and charged 
to convict at 
cost. 



(B) When forfeited : 



(^) Rezuard of assistance to prisoner'' s family. 



(A) When permitted 

Michigan Managers of 

Detroit House of 
Correction arid 
State Prisons to 
pay over to su- 
perintendents of 
poor of city or 
county in which 
wife and chil- 
dren of prisoners 
live, $1.50 per 
week for each 
child under 15. 

Minnesota R e f o rmatory 
Board may make 
provision for 
moderate assist- 
ance to families 
of convicts to be 
paid from cur- 
rent expense fund 
of institution. 

Missouri County court 

t o appropriate 
from county 
treasury amount 
not exceeding 
$12,000 per year 
for the partial 
support of wid- 
ows or wives of 
prisoners w h o 
are poor and 
have children 
under 14; such 
allowance not to 
exceed $ic per 
month if there 
be one child; 
S15 per month if 
more; children 



Acts of 

1907, 

No. 144. 



R. S. 

1905. 

C. 105, 

Sec. 

5459. 



Acts of 
1 9 10, 
H. B. 
626. 



(B) When forfeited; 



(340) 



No. 4] 



HOW IS HE CARED FOR 



89 



New Jersey 



(A) When permitted : 
to live with 
mother who 
would otherwise 
be obliged to 
live away from 
them. Woman 
must be m e n- 
tally, morally 
and physically 
able to bring up 
her children. 

Prisoners' fam- Laws of 
ilies dependent 191 1, 
on charity re- S. B. 
lieved by Com- 1150. 

missioner of 
Charities at the 
rate of 50 cents 
for every day the 
prisoner works. 
The relief fund 
limited to 5 per 
cent of the value 
of all goods pro- 
duced. 



(B) When forfeited : 



4. General Education. 
(a) Prison schools are provided: 

Arkansas Chaplain to establish a night school R. S. 1904, C. 

for young convicts and instruct them 123, Sec. 5893. 

in studies arranged by board. 
Georgia Reformatory prisoners to receive in- R. S. 191 1, Sec. 

struction in elementary branches and 1243. 

manual training. 
Illinois Chaplain to give instruction in such R. S. 1909, Page 

English branches as warden feels will 1670, Sec. 23. 

be of benefit between 6 and 9 P. M. 

daily. 
Indiana Instruction of an educational and R. S. 1908, Sec. 

technical nature as shall be to the best 9844. 

interest of the inmates. 

Trade schools at the reformatory. R. S. 1908, Sec. 

9905- 
Iowa Chaplain to give instruction in ordi- R. S. 1897, Title 

nary branches of English to illiterate 26, C. 2, Sec. 

convicts. 5671. 

Reformatory prisoners to be em- R. S. 1897, Sec. 

ployed in trades conducive to Intel- 2706. 

lectual and moral development. 
Kansas Chaplain to teach convalescents and R. S. 1909, C. 

others whose task is performed within 108, Sec. 8577. 

less than required hours of labor and 

who wish to avail themselves of his as- 
sistance in acquiring an elementary 

education. 
Kentucky Convicts to be trained in common Laws of 1910, C. 

branches of English and in some trade, 15. 

industry or handicraft ; common schools 

and trade schools to be maintained for 

the purpose. 

(341) 



90 

Maine 

Massachusetts 
Michigan 
New Jersey 



New York 
Tennessee 

Texas 
Vermont 

Utah 
Wisconsin 

Alabama 

Arkansas 

Connecticut 

Colorado 

Idaho 

Illinois 
Maine 
Michigan 
Texas 

Utah 
Vermont 



THE CAGED MAN 

Inspectors to establish rules for the 
instruction of convicts. 

$2,000.00 appropriation annually for 
prison schools. 

A school to be maintained in each 
prison. 

Board of inspectors to equip school 
and have control and supervision 
thereof, to appoint teachers who must 
have certificate prescribed by State 
Board of Education, and must not be 
inmates of the prison. Studies to be 
the same as those in public schools. 

Moral instructors to devote their 
entire time to work. 

Under supervision of the chaplain. 

Chaplain to instruct those under 16 
and older if they desire 2 hours per 
week. 

Prisoners to be taught elementary 
branches of English. 

Educational instruction to be given. 



Schools to be conducted in the prison. 

Chaplain to conduct school for three 
hours one day per week. 

(b) Prison Libraries are provided: 
Appropriation of $500.00 per year 
for books. 

Chaplain in charge of library. 

Appropriation of $500 annually for 
library purposes. 

Warden to act as librarian. 

Appropriation of $75 per annum ; 
warden to purchase books and report 
to Governor annually the effect upon 
conduct, mental and moral improve- 
ment of the prisoners. 

Chaplain to take charge of library. 

Appropriation of $50 annually; war- 
den to take charge of library. 

Library subject to instruction of 
board. 

Chaplain to act as librarian. 



As board directs. 

Board of Library Commissioners to 
have care and supervision of suitable 
libraries in penal and charitable insti- 
tutions; they may expend $500 for this 
purpose in 191 1, and $200 a year there- 
after. 

(342) 



[Vol. Ill 

R. S. 1903, Title 

12, C. 141, Sec. 

II. 
R. S. 1902, C. 

224, Sec. 73. 
R. S. 1897, Sec. 

2134. 
R. S. 1910, Page 

4927, Sees. 69- 

76. 



R. S. 1910, Page 

4914, Sec. 7. 
R. S. 1909, C. 47, 

Sec. 139. 
R. S. 1896, Title 

7, C. 2, Sec. 

7509. 
R. S. 191 1, Sec. 

6203. 
R. S. 1906, Title 

33. C. 261, 

Sees. 6072-73. 
R. S. 1907, C. 10, 

Sec. 2279. 
R. S. 1898, C. 

201, Sec. 4905. 



R. S. 1907, C. 

191, Sec. 6539. 
R. S. 1904, C. 

123, Sec. 5893. 
R. S. 1902, C. 

176, Sec. 2922. 
R. S. 1908, C. 

108. Sec. 4847. 
R. S. 1908, Part 

3, Title 2, Sec. 

8510- 



R. S. 1909, Page 

1670, Sec. 23. 
R. S. 1903. C. 

141, Sec. 51. 
R. S. 1897, Sec. 

2135. 
R. S. 191 1, Title 

104, C. 2, Sec. 

6203. 
R. S. 1907, C. 10, 

Sec. 2280. 
Laws of 1910, 

No. 235. 



No. 4] HOW IS HE CARED FOR 

Wisconsin' Chaplain in charge of library. 

(c) Industrial Training provided: 

Georgia Reformatory prisoners to receive 

instruction in elementary branches and 

manual training. 
Indiana Instruction of an educational and 

technical nature as shall be to the best 

interest of the inmates. 

Trade schools at the Reformatory. 

Iowa Reformatory prisoners to be em- 

ployed in trades conducive to intel- 
lectual and moral development. 

Kansas Trades which will enable prisoners 

to earn a living on release. 

E^ENTUCKY Convicts to be trained in common 

branches of English and in some trade, 
industry or handicraft ; common schools 
and trade schools to be maintained for 
the purpose. 

Minnesota Trades for which prisoner seems best 

suited. 

Ohio Superintendent of reformatory au- 

thorized to expend not more than 5 per 
cent of gross earnings of inmates for 
equipment of industrial training schools 
which will fit for self-support upon 
release. 



91 

R. S. 1898, C. 
201, Sec. 4905. 



R. S. 191 1, Sec. 
1243- 

R. S. 1908, Sec. 
9844. 

R. S. 1908, Sec. 

9905- 
R. S. 1897, Sec. 

2706. 

R. S. 1909, Sec. 

8595- 
Laws of 1 9 10, C. 

15- 



R. S. 1905, C. 

105, Sec. 5458. 
R. S\ 1 9 10, Div. 

4, C. I, Sec. 

2137- 



(343) 



VII. 



Who can set him free? 

As the result of good conduct prisoners may be allowed 
limited freedom or parole through action taken by : 

1. The Governor. 

Alabama Governor may, when he thinks best, Crim. Code, 1907, 

authorize the discharge of any convict C. 265, Sees, 
from custody and suspend the sentence 7515-16. 

of such convict without granting a par- 
don, and prescribe the terms upon 
which a convict so paroled shall have 
his sentence suspended. Upon the 
failure of any con\T[ct to observe the 
conditions of his parole, to be deter- 
mined by the governor, the governor 
shall have authority to direct the re- 
arrest and return of such convict to 
custody and thereupon convict shall be 
required to carry out sentence of court 
as though no parole had been granted 
him. 

Missouri The Governor shall have power to Const. 1875, Art. 

grant reprieves, commutations and par- 5, Sec. 8. 

dons after conviction, for all offenses 
except treason and cases of impeach- 
ment ; upon such conditions and with 
such restrictions and limitations as he 
may think proper, subject to such regu- 
lations as may be provided by law 
relative to the manner of applying for 
pardons. 1 

Oklahoma The Governor has power to grant Const. 1907, Art. 

paroles and reprieves. 6, Sec. 10. 

2. The Parole Board. 

Arizona The parole board is composed of the Laws 1912, C. 46. 

governor, warden of state prison, 
state auditor, attorney general, and the 
physician of the prison. The warden 
is president and a parole clerk is ap- 
pointed by the governor. Any pris- 
oner who has served his minimum 
sentence, and any prisoner serving a 
fixed term who has a clean record for 
the time served, is eligible for parole. 
Where a paroled prisoner has reverted 
or is about to revert to criminal habits, 
any member of the board may issue a 

1 Under this constitutional pro\'ision Governor Hadley has established _a 
parole system, which has been extended to j-oung and first offenders, and is 
entirely within the discretion of the Governor assisted by the Pardon Attorney. 

(344) 



No. 4] 



WHO CAN SET HIM FREE 



93 



California 



Colorado 



Connecticut 



Idaho 



Indiana 



Illinois 



Iowa 



Title 



warrant for him. He may be finally 
discharged whenever the board decides 
he is worthy of discharge. 

The parole board is appointed by Laws 1901, P. 82. 
the Governor and includes the war- 
dens of the two state prisons. Gov- 
ernor can revoke parole. Prisoners 
who have a clear record for six months 
and against whom there are no charges 
pending and life termers after seven 
years are eligible for parole. Prison- 
ers are finally discharged at expira- 
tion of maximum parole or may be 
discharged sooner by board. 

Parole board is composed of Gov- R. S. 1908, C. 35, 
ernor and four members appointed by Sees. 2039-42. 

him. Prisoners are eligible for parole 
at the expiration of minimum sen- 
tence. They are finally discharged 
after service of maximum sentence, 
either in prison or on parole. 

The parole board consists of the R. S. 1902, 
board of directors, the superintendent 7, Sees. 1535- 

and warden. Prisoners who have 41. 
served a minimum term of at least 
twelve months are eligible for parole. 
They are finally discharged by expira- 
tion of maximum sentence or unani- 
mous vote of all members of board at 
any stated meeting. 

The parole board consists of the R. S. 1908, Part 
board of pardons and the warden. 2, Title 10, Sec. 

Prisoners are eligible for parole who 8259. 
have not previously been sentenced for 
a felony and who have served Yz of 
full term, not reckoning good time. All 
persons to be graded and none paroled 
until they have served 6 months in 
highest grade. Life prisoners may not 
be paroled. 

Parole board consists of warden, 
three directors, chaplain and physician. 
Prisoners who have served minimum 
sentence are eligible for parole. They 
are finally discharged when board is 
satisfied they will live orderly if freed 
from parole restrictions. 

The parole board is the same as the 
board of pardons with the warden as 
an advisory member. Prisoners are 
eligible for parole when they have 
served at least 11 months unless old 
offenders, when 21 months must be 
served. When prisoner has served 
parole of 12 months board makes order 
for final discharge, which when ap- 
proved by Governor is final. 

Parole board consists of three citi- R. S. 1907- Title 
zens, not more than two of one political 26, C. 2, Sec. 

party and one a duly licensed attor- S7i8, a 18, 19, 

ney at law, appointed by Governor with 20. 

(345) 



R. S. 1908, Sec. 
9870. 



R. S. 1909. C. 38, 
Sec. 501. 



94 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Kansas 



Kentucky 



Massachusetts 



Michigan 



Minnesota 



Montana 



ad\-ice of Senate. Prisoners are eligi- 
ble for parole when thej' have served 
II months, except when maximum is 2 
3-ears or less, then 6 months. They 
are finally discharged when they have 
served 12 months parole acceptably and 
if likely to be reliable and trustworthy 
in future. 

Parole board is composed of prison 
board with warden as member and 
secretary. Prisoners are eligible for 
parole when they have served minimum 
with 6 months of clear prison record 
except when committed for murder in 
the first or second degree, or serving 
third term. 

Parole board consists of board of 
four penitentiary commissioners. Pris- 
oners are eligible for parole who have 
served minimum sentence and life pris- 
oners who have served 5 3'ears. All 
must have good beha\'ior record for 
9 months. 

Parole board consists of five prison 
commissioners appointed bj' Governor 
with consent of council. Prisoner must 
be paroled at expiration of minimum 
sentence if record has been perfect ; 
otherwise, date is set \iy commissioners. 
Prisoners are finally discharged auto- 
matically at expiration of maximum. 

Parole board consists of Governor 
and advisory board of four. In some 
instances of Governor alone. Warden 
makes recommendation. Convicts are 
eligible for parole at expiration of 
minimum sentence, except third termers 
whose period of parole must not ex- 
ceed four years. Final discharge comes 
at expiration of parole if there has 
been faithful observance of require- 
ments. The period is fixed at time of 
parole. 

The board of parole consists of three 
members — the president of the board 
of control, the warden of the prison 
and a citizen appointed by the gover- 
nor w-ith consent of senate. All pris- 
oners are eligible for parole at discre- 
tion of board, except life prisoners ; 
life prisoners may be paroled after 
thirty-five j^ears less commutation for 
good beha\"ior. Prisoners are finally 
discharged by Governor upon recom- 
mendation by board. 

The state board of prison commis- 
sioners acts as board of parole, upon 
recommendation of Governor. First 
offenders for felony are eligible for 
parole after they have served one-half 
of term, not reckoning good time. 

f346) 



R. S. 1909, C. 97, 
Sec. 6841. 



Laws 1910, C. 16. 



1911, C. 451. 



Laws 1905, C. 
184. 



Laws 1911, C. 
298. 



R. S. 1907, Part 
2, Title 12, C 
13. Sees. 9573- 
9575- 



No. 4] 



WHO CAN SET HIM FREE 



95 



1911, 



Convicts serving time sentence may be 
paroled after they have served twelve 
and one-half years where term was 
more than 25 years, and life prisoners 
having served 25 years, less commu- 
tation for good behavior. The gov- 
ernor, upon recommendation of board, 
finally discharges convicts who have 
fulfilled requirements. 

Nebraska The parole board consists of the Laws 

state prison board appointed by the 184. 

Governor — one member to be a prac- 
ticing physician and one a practicing 
attorney. Prisoners are eligible for 
parole when they have served their 
minimum sentence. Six months faith- 
ful observance of parole requirements 
is reported by secretary of board which 
issues certificate which is sent to Gov- 
ernor. Upon recommendation of board 
Governor finally discharges prisoner. 

Ne\t Hampshire Governor and council act as parole Laws 1909, C. 
board. Prisoner is paroled automati- 120. 

cally at end of minimum sentence if 
obedient to rules ; otherwise governor 
and council determine. Prisoner is 
finally discharged by Governor at ex- 
piration of maximum sentence. 

New Jersey Board of inspectors of prison act as Laws 191 1, C. 

parole board with approval of gover- igi. 

nor. Prisoners whose minimum sen- 
tence is about to expire are eligible for 
parole. Final discharge comes after 
faithful observance of conditions of 
parole until maximum has expired. 
Prisoners on parole can earn commu- 
tation and thus have maximum expire 
sooner. 

New Mexico The board of parole is composed of Laws 1909, C. 32. 

the prison board and the superin- 
tendent of the penitentiary. The Gov- 
ernor must approve recommendations. 
All prisoners who have served mini- 
mum except those having served two 
previous terms in any penitentiary. 
Superintendent, after prisoner has 
served not less than six months of his 
parole acceptably, reports to board to 
recommend to trial judge who certifies 
to Governor, who finally discharges 
him. 

New York Board of control consists of super- Laws 1909, C. 47, 

intendent of prisons and two members Art. 8, Sec. 10. 

appointed by the Governor with con- 
sent of Senate. Board to devise sys- 
tem of marking persons, a certain num- 
ber of marks to be necessary before re- 
lease on parole. Prisoners never before 
convicted and who have served mini- 
mum sentence eligible for parole. Final 
discharge when board deems it not in- 
compatible with the welfare of society. 

(S47) 



96 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



North Dakota The parole board is a board of ex- R. S. 1909, C. 

perts consisting of the warden, prison 173. 

physician, a prison chaplain and one 
other person designated by the board 
of control. Prisoners are eligible for 
parole when they have served their 
minimum term ; employment must be 
secured and employer recommended by 
judge of county court. Final dis- 
charge comes on expiration of maxi- 
mum sentence. Warden gn^ves dis- 
charge. 

Ohio Parole board composed of eight mem- R. S. 1910, Sees, 

bers — a president and two other lay 2141-44, 2167- 
members, a physician,- a fiscal super- 75. 

visor, a mechanical engineer, . a secre- 
tary and a parole secretary. Prisoners 
are eligible for parole when they are 
recommended by the warden and chap- 
lain, have served a minimum of not 
less than one 3'ear, if their conduct in 
prison has been of the first grade for 
six months prior to application and if 
they have never been convicted of fel- 
on}' before. In case of life prisoners they 
must have served twenty-five j'ears. 
An agreement, from a reliable prop- 
erty owner certified from the auditor of 
the county that he is a property owTier 
and that he will give prisoner employ- 
ment on release, is necessary. Final 
discharge is given by board of admin- 
istration and the warden to convict who 
has certificate showing faithful com- 
pliance with parole agreement. 

Pennsylvania Board of parole consists of board R. S. 1909, pp. 

of 5 prison inspectors from each peni- 5329-31. 

tentiary, who report to the board of 
pardons — consisting of lieutenant-gov- 
ernor, secretary of the commonwealth, 
attorney-general and secretary of inter- 
nal affairs, three of whom must recom- 
mend to the governor for final action. 
Prisoners are eligible for parole when 
they have served a minimum sentence 
and are in good standing. Application 
can be filed any time within three 
months of the expiration of minimum 
term. Final discharge comes at ex- 
piration of maximum sentence or the 
board of inspectors may sooner recom- 
mend absolute pardon to the board of 
pardons which recommends to gov- 
ernor. 

South Dakota The parole board is composed of the Laws 191 1, C. 

board of charities and corrections and 198. 

one parole officer. Prisoner may peti- 
tion for parole after expiration of 
minimum sentence. Final discharge is 
b}' order of warden and board of char- 
ities ,at expiration of parole. 
(348) 



No. 4] WHO CAN SET HIM FREE 97 

Texas Board of parole consists of three Laws 1911, C. 43. 

prison commissioners requiring the ap- 
proval of the governor. Prisoners are 
eligible for parole when they have 
served twelve months with good con- 
duct and have completed minimum 
sentence. Final discharge comes auto- 
matically at the expiration of time 
originally given in sentence but com- 
mission has power to grant absolute 
discharge in deserving cases before the 
expiration thereof. 

Wisconsin The state board of control acts as Laws 1907, C. 

parole board. Prisoners in state prison no. 

are eligible for parole when they have 
served one half of sentence. Life term- 
ers can only be considered when they 
have served 30 years less commutation 
which is 16 years and 3 months. No 
convict previously CG^ivicted of felonj' 
is eligible. Final discharge comes auto- 
matically at the expiration of sen- 
tence, less commutation for good be- 
havior. 

Wyoming The pardon board acts as board of R. S. 1910, C. 42, 

parole. The governor issues parole Sees. 530-531. 
upon its recommendation. No parole 
can be granted to any prisoner who has 
returned from parole as a delinquent ; 
who has served a previous term in any 
penitentiary, who has not served the 
minimum term fixed by law, or the 
minimum term fixed at time of sen- 
tence by the trial judge; who has vio- 
lated any of the rules of the peniten- 
tiary within six months prior to his 
application, or who has committed an 
assault with a deadly weapon upon 
any officer, employee or other convict 
in the state penitentiary. Final dis- 
charge comes automatically at expira- 
tion of maximum sentence, or sooner 
if commutation for good behavior re- 
duces maximum. 

Manumission from penal servitude is at the hand of the 
state executive, assisted in a number of states by the advice of 
a special board designated for that purpose though the council 
and senate participate in certain states while in still others 
the responsibility has been taken from the governor and in- 
vested in the legislature, or in Pardon Boards. 



I. The Pardoning Power exercised by the Governor {except in cases of treason 
and impeachment) in: 

Arizona Const. 1910, Art. 

5. Sec. S. 

(349) 



98 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Delaware 

Illinois 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Maryland 

Michigan 

Missouri 

New Hampshire 

New Mexico 

New York 

North Carolina 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Virginia 

Vermont 
Washington 
West Virginia 

Wisconsin 
Wyoming 



No pardon to convicts who have been 
twice convicted except upon written 
recommendation of a majority of judges 
of the supreme court. 



Governor must file statement of rea- 
sons for pardon which shall be open to 
public inspection. 

Before granting pardon Governor 
must publish a notice in one or more 
newspapers of the application and the 
date on or after which the decision 
will be given. 



Except for offenses for which a per- 
son is convicted before the senate. 



Except in cases where the prosecu- 
tion has been carried on by the House 
of Delegates. 



Excent in cases where prosecution 
has been carried on by House of Dele- 
gates. 



(350) 



Const. 1874, Art. 

6, Sec. 18. 
R. S. 1904, C. 49, 

Sees. 2565-75. 
Const. 1879, Art. 



Const. 1876, Art. 

4, Sec. 7. 
Const. 1831, Art. 

3. Sec. 9. 
Const. 1870, Art. 

5, Sec. 13. 
Const. 1857, Art. 

4, Sec. 16. 
Const. 1859, Art. 

1, Sec. 7. 
Const. 1891, Sec. 

77, R. S. 1909, 
Sec. 3836. 
Const. 1867, Art. 

2, Sec. 20. 



Const. 1850, Art. 

5, Sec. II. 
Const. 187s, Art. 

S, Sec. 8. 
Const. 1902, Art. 

51- 
Const, igio, Art. 

5, Sec. 6. 
Const. 1894, Art. 

4, Sec. 5. 
Const. 1876, Art. 

3, Sec. 6. 
Const. 1851, Art. 

3, Sec. II. 
Const. 1857, Art. 

5, Sec. 14. 
Const. 1870, Art. 

3, Sec. 6. 
Const. 1876, Art. 

4, Sec. II. 
Const. 1902, Art. 

5, Sec. 73. 

Const. 1793, C. 2, 

Sec. II. 
Const. 1889, Art. 

3, Sees. 9, II. 
Const. 1872. Art. 

7, Sec. II. 

Const. 1848, Art. 

<;, Sec. 6. 
R.' S. 1898, Sec. 

4861. 
Const. 1889, Art. 

4. Sec. 5. 



No. 4] 



WHO CAN SET HIM FREE 



99 



2. The Pardoning Power exercised by the Governor and 
(^except in cases of treason or impeachment) 

Alabama Board consists of attorney-general, 

secretary of state and state auditor. 
Board hears all cases in open session 
and gives opinion thereon in writing. 

Florida Board consists of justices of supreme 

court and attorney-general. 

GEORGL-i Prison commission constitutes board 

and investigates every case deserving 
clemency. 



Idaho 

Indiana 

Louisiana 

Minnesota 
Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New Jersey 
North Dakota 
Oklahoma 

Pennsylvania 



South Carolina 
South Dakota 



Board consists of governor, secretary 
of state and attorney-general. Open 
hearings on all cases and public notice 
in newspapers. 

Board to be constituted by general 
assembly and to be composed of officers 
of the law. 

Board of control. Not more than 
one out of five life convicts to be par- 
doned in one year. 

Board consists of attorney-general 
and chief justice of the supreme court. 

Board consists of secretary of state, 
attorney-general and state auditor. 
Publication at least twice before par- 
don is granted of reasons therefor. 

State prison board advisory board 
of Pardons. 



Governor, justices of supreme court 
and attorney-general constitute the 
board of pardons. 

Governor, chancellor and the six 
judges of the court of appeals form 
board of pardons. 

The attorney-general, chief justice of 
supreme court and two qualified elec- 
tors. Pardons must be unanimous. 

State superintendent of public in- 
struction, president of board of agri- 
culture and state auditor. Board 
holds hearing and within 20 days files 
with secretary of state its decision in 
writing. 

Lieutenant-governor, secretary of the 
commonwealth, attorney-general and 
secretary of internal affairs. Board 
makes recommendations in writing 
after full hearing and due public 
notice. 

Board to be chosen by general as- 
sembly. 

Board consists of presiding judge, 
secretary of state and attorney-general. 
Pardons not permitted in cases of capi- 
tal punishment, imprisonment for life 
or for a longer term than two years or 
a fine exceeding $200. 

(351) 



Board of Pardons 

in : 

Const. 1901, Sec. 
124. 



Const. 1885, Art. 

4, Sec. 12. 
Const. 1877, Art. 

5, P. 12. 

R. S. 1911, Sec. 

1222. 
Const. 1889, Art. 

4, Sec. 17. 

R. S. 1908, C. 13, 

Sec. 8251. 
Const. 1851, Art. 

5, Sec. 143. 

Acts of 1890, No. 
112. 

Const. 1857, Art. 

5> Sec. 4. 
R. S. 1907, Sec. 

9556- 



Const. 187s, Art 

5, Sec. 13. 
R. S. 1911, Sec. 

2743- 
Const. 1864, Art. 

5, Sec. 14. 
R. S. 1912, Sec. 

7623. 
Const. 1844, Art. 

5, Sec. 10. 

R. S. 1906, Sees. 
10240- 10243. 

Laws of 1908, C. 
62. 



Const. 1873, Art. 
4, Sec. 9. 



Const. 1895, Art. 

4, Sec. II. 
Const. 1889, Art. 

4. Sec. 5. 



lOO THE CAGED MAN 

3. The Pardoning Power exercised by the Governor and Board of Pardons 

{except in cases of treason and impeachment) in: 

Utah Governor, justices of the supreme Const. 1896, Art 

court, and attorney-general. No par- 7, Sec. 12. 

don except after full public hearing 
of which public notice has been given. 

4. The Pardoning Power exercised by the Governor and council {except in 

cases of treason and impeachment') in: 

Maine Const. 1820, Art. 

5, Sec. II. 
Massachusetts Const. 1780, C. 2, 

Sec. 8. 

5. The Pardoning Power exercised by the Governor and Senate {except in 

cases of treason and impeachment) in: 

Iowa In cases of murder of first degree. R. S. 1897, C. 49, 

Sec. 5626. 

Mississippi No pardon until applicant shall have Const. 1910, Art- 

published for 30 days in a newspaper 5, Sec. 124. 

or elsewhere in county where crime was 
committed his petition and reasons for 
pardon. 

6. The Pardoning Po7i>er exercised by the Legislature in: 

Connecticut Governor may only grant reprieves Const. 1882, Art. 

until end of next session of the legis- 4, Sec. 10. 

lature. 
Rhode Island Governor maj^ only grant reprieves Const. 1842, Art. 

until end of next session of the legis- 7, Sec. 4. 

lature. 

(352) 



VIII 



SPECIFIC DISABILITIES CAUSED BY PRISON SENTENCE 

- A prison sentence usually involves certain specific disabilities, 
such as (i) Loss of citizenship, (2) Loss of power of procreation 
through vasectomy, (3) Loss of marital rights, (4) Loss of pre- 
sumption of innocence in subsequent prosecutions for crime, (5) 
Loss of rights to ordinary burial of corpse. 



I. Loss of Citizenship.* 



(A) How rights are lost; 



Alabama 



Arkansas 



California 



Colorado 



Const. 

igor, 

Sec. 182. 

R. S. 

1904, 

C.57. 

Sec. 

2768. 
Const. 

1879, 
Art. 2, 
Sec. I. 



R. S. 
1908, 

C.43. 
Sec. 
2148. 



(B) How rights may be regained: 
Alabama Specifically ex- Const. 

pressed in par^ 

don. 
Arkansas When par 

doned. 



California 



Colorado 



A special exec- 
utive act may re- 
store a convict 
to c i t izenship 
but does not re- 
move the infamy 
and disability. 

On presenting 
to the Governor 
a certificate from 
the warden that 
the entire time of 
sentence has been 
passed without 
violation of rules. 



1901, 

Sec. 124. 

R. S. 

1904, 

C.57. 

Sec. 

2768. 
Const. 

1849. 
Art. 7. 



R. S. 

1908, 

C. 108, 

Sec. 

4876. 



Loss of citizenship does not take place: 



Arizona 



Michigan 

New Hampshire 

Pennsylvania 

Vermont 



For the purpose of voting, no per- 
son shall be deemed to have gained or 
lost a residence by reason of his pres- 
ence or absence while employed in the 
service of the United States, or while 
a student at any institution of learning, 
or while kept at any almshouse or 
other asylum at public expense, or while 
confined in any public jail or prison. 



Const. 1910, Art. 
7, Sec. 3. 



(353) 



Const. 1850, Art. 

7, Sec. 5. 

R. S. 1901, C. 31, 

Sec. 9. 
Const. 1873. Art. 

8, Sec. 13, Par. 
148. 

R. S. 1906, Title 
3, C. 7, Sec. 73. 



I02 



THE CAGED 31 AN 



[Vol. Ill 



TA) How rights are lost ; 



Connecticut 



Delaware 



District of 
Columbia 



Florida 



Georgia 



Idaho 



Illinois 



Indiana 



General A s- 
sembly has 
power to deprive 
any one con- 
victed of crime 
of right of suf- 
rage. 



Iowa 



Kansas 



Kentucky 



Const. 

1818, 
Art. 6, 
Sec. 3. 

R. S. 
1898-99, 

C. 36, 
Sec. 9. 

R. S. 

1911, 
Sees. 215 
and 261. 

R. S. 

1906, 

P.I, 

Title 4, 

Art. I, 

Sec. 170. 

R. S. 
1911, 
Sec. 
1077. 

R. S. 
1908, 
P. I, 

Title 15, 
Sec. 
7239- 
R. S. 
1909, 
Page 

967, 
Sec. 70. 

Const. 

1851, 

Sec. 89. 



Const. 

1857. 
Art. 2. 

R. S. 
1909, 
Sec. 
2803. 



R. S. 
1908, 

C.41, 
Sec. 

1439- 



(B) How rights may be regained : 



Delaware Laws of 

1898, 
C. 247, 
Sec. 5. 



Florida When par- R. S, 

doned. 1906, 

Div. 5. 

Title 2, 

C. I, 

Sec. 

4077. 

Georgia When par- R. S. 

doned. 191 !» 

Sec. 



Idaho 



Illinois 



Iowa 



Kansas 



By governor. 



par- 
after 



When 
doned 01 
expiration of 
term of disfran- 
chisement. 



1077. 

R. S. 

1908, 
Part 2, 
Title 10, 

Sec. 

8257. 

R. S. 

1909, 

Page 

1676, 
Sec. 49. 



By governor. 


R. S. 
1897, 
Sec. 


R e f rmatory 


5706. 
R. S. 


prisoners. 


1909, 
Sec. 


First offenders. 


8636. 
R. S. 




1909, 

Sec. 




2805. 



(354) 



No. 4] 



SPECIFIC DISABILITIES 



103 



(A) 


How rights are lost : 


(B) How 


rights may be regained : 


Louisiana 


Const. 


Louisiana 


Only if par- 


Const. 




1898, 




doned with ex- 


1898, 




Art. 202. 




pressed restora- 
tion of franchise. 


Art. 202. 


Maine 


Const. 
1819, 
Art. 2, 
Sec. I. 








Maryland 


Const. 

1867, 

Art. I, 

Sec. 2. 








Massachu- 


Const. 








setts 


1779, 
Amdt. 3. 








Minnesota 


Const. 

1858, 

Art. 4, 

Sec. 15. 








Mississippi 


R. S. 

1906, 

C. 119, 

Sec. 
4121. 








Missouri 


Const. 


Missouri 


In cases of first 


R. S. 




1875, 




conviction civil 


1909, 




Art. 8. 




disabilities are 
removed at end 
of five years and 
convict restored 
to full rights. 


Art. 19 
Sec. 
1656. 


Montana 


Const. 


Montana 


Governor has 


R. S. 




1889, 




power to restore 


1907, 




Art. 9, 




civil rights after 


Sec. 




Sec. 2. 




due cause is 

shown. 


9572. 


Nebraska 


Const. 

1875, 
Art. 7, 
Sec. 2. 


Nebraska 


By governor. 


R. S. 

1911, 
Part 2, 
C. 24, 

Sec. 

2414. 


Nevada 


Const. 


Nevada 


If so stated in 


R. S. 




1910, 




the instrument of 


1912, 




Art. 2, 




pardon. 


Sec. 




Sec. I. 






7625. 


New Jersey 


Const. 

1897, 
Art. 2. 


New Jersey 


If pardoned. 


R. S. 
1910, 
Page 

2 ICO. 


New Mexico 


R. S. 


New Mexico Convict who 


Laws of 




1897, 




passes entire 


1899, 




Sec. 




period of his 


C. I, 




1672. 




sentence without 
any violation of 
rules entitled to 
certificate from 
Board of Peni- 
tentiary Commis- 
sioners on pre- 
sentation of 
which Governor 
may restore citi- 
zenship. 


Sec. 2. 



(355) 



I04 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



(A) H 


ovv rights are lost : 


(B) How 


rights may be regained : 


New York 


R. S. 1 
1909, 
Art. 46, 
Sec. 510. 








North 


r:s. 


North 


Petition may 


R. S. 


Carolina 


1908, 


Carolina 


be filed with su- 


1908, 




C. 90, 




perior court any 


Sees. 




Sec. 




time four years 


2675, 




4315- 




after date of con- 
viction. Appli- 
cant must prove 
by five respecta- 
ble citizens that 
h i s reputation 
for truth and 
honesty has been 
good during in- 
tervening years. 


2680. 


North 


Const. 


North 


If pardoned. 


R. S. 


Dakota 


1889, 
Amdts, i 
Art. 2. 


Dakota 




1905, 

Sec. 

10251. 


Ohio 


R. S. 


Ohio 


Convict w h 


R. S. 




1910, 




serves his entire 


1910, 




Sec. 




time without vio- 


Title 4, 




12390. 




lation of rules, 
on presentation 
to Governor of 
certificate of 
good conduct 
furnished by war- 
den. 


C. 2, 
Sec. 
2161. 


Oklahoma 


Const. 

1907, 

Art. 3, 

Sec. I. 








Oregon 


Const. 
1859, 
Art. 2. 


Oregon 


If pardoned. 


Const. 

1859, 
Art. 2, 
Sec. 3. 

R. S. 

1910, 

Sec. 

2380. 


Rhode 


R. S. 


1 Rhode 


Only by act 


R. S. 


Island. 


1909, 


' Island. 


of the general 


1909, 




Title 37, 




assembly. 


Title 37 




C. 354, 






C. 354, 




Sec. 62. 


1 




Sec. 62. 


South 


Const. 


1 South 


If pardoned. 


Const. 


Carolina 


1S95, 
Art. 2, 
Sec. 6. 


Carolina 




1895. 
Art. 2, 

Sec. 6. 


South 


R. S. 


South 


Convict with 


R. S. 


Dakota 


1907, 


Dakota 


clean record for 


1910, 




C. 142, 




good conduct. 


Sec. 686 




Sec. 74. 








Tennessee 


R. S. 

1896, 

Title 6, 

C. 2, Sec. 

II 70. 


Tennessee 


If pardoned. 


R. S. 
1896, 
Title 4, 
C. 18, 
Sec. 
7235- 



(356) 



No. 4] 



SPECIFIC DISABILITIES 



105 



(A) How rights are lost : 
Texas Const. 

1876, 
Art. 6, 
Sec. I. 



Utah Const. 

1896, 
Art. 4, 
Sec. 6. 

Virginia Const. 

1902, 
Art. 2, 
Sec. 23. 

Const. 
1889, 
Art. 6, 
Sec. 3. 

Const. 
1872, 
Art. 4, 
Sec. I. 

I Const. 

1848, 
Art. 3, 
Sec. 2. 

Const, 
1889, 
Art. 6, 
Sec. 6. 



Washington 



West 
Virginia 



Wisconsin 



Wyoming 



(B) How rights may be regained : 
Texas If pardoned. R, S. 

1911, 

Title 36, 

C. 3, Sec. 

2938. 



Wisconsin If pardoned. 



Wyoming If pardoned. 



Const. 
1848, 
Art. 3, 
Sec. 2. 

R. S. 
1910, 

c. 395. 

Sec. 
6030. 



2. Loss of pozver of procreation {Vasectomy authorized) : 



Connecticut When convict is determined to be in- Laws of 1909, C. 

capable of producing offspring men- 209. 

tally, morally and physically sound. 

Indiana Skilled surgeons, in conjunction with Laws of 1907, C. 

chief physician, to examine the mental 2x5. 

and physical condition of such inmates 
as are recommended by the institution 
physician and board of managers ; and 
if this committee of experts deem pro- 
creation inadvisable and there is no 
probability of improvement in the men- 
tal condition it shall be lawful for the 
surgeons to perform the operation. 

New Jersey Governor appoints one surgeon and Acts of 1911, C. 

one neurologist to act in conjunction 190. 

with the commissioner of charities 
and corrections and to be known as 
" Board of Examiners of Feeble- 
minded." This board determines 
whether or not operation shall be per- 
formed on feeble-minded, epileptics, 
rr.pists, certain criminals and other de- 
fectives. 

(357) 



io6 

New York 



Washington 

Alabama 
Arizona 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 
Connecticut 

Delaware 
Georgia 

Idaho 

Illinois 
Indiana 
Iowa 

Kansas 
Kentucky 

Louisiana 
Maine 



THE CAGED 31 AN 

Governor appoints one surgeon, one 
neurologist and one practitioner of 
medicine, each with at least lo years' 
experience, to be known as the " Board 
of Examiners of Feeble-minded, crim- 
inal and other defectives." To ex- 
amine into the mental and physical con- 
dition, and the record and family his- 
tory of the feeble-minded, etc., and 
to prevent procreation if in their judg- 
ment defective children would be pro- 
duced. 

When adjudged guilty of carnal 
abuse of female under lo years or of 
rape. 

3. Loss of Marital Rights: 

Imprisonment for two years, the sen- 
tence being for seven years or longer, a 
ground for divorce. 

No suit sustained until one year after 
conviction. Husband must not be con- 
victed on testimony of wife or wife on 
that of husband. 

Conviction of either party of felony 
or other infamous crime, a ground for 
divorce. 

Conviction for felony a ground for 
divorce. 

Conviction for felony a ground for 
divorce. 

Imprisonment for life. Imprison- 
ment in the state prison for crime in- 
volving a violation of conjugal duty, a 
ground for divorce. 

Conviction after marriage, whether 
crime was committed before or after 
marriage, a ground for divorce. 

Imprisonment for two years or 
longer, a ground for divorce. 

Conviction of felony, a ground for 
divorce. 

Conviction for felony or other in- 
famous crime, a ground for divorce. 

Conviction after marriage, a ground 
for divorce. 

Conviction after marriage, a ground 
for divorce. 



[Vol. Ill 

Laws of 1912. 
Art. 19. 



Conviction after marriage, 
for divorce. 

Conviction for felony in 
state, a ground for divorce. 



a ground 
out of 



or 



Conviction for infamous cr: 
ground for divorce. 

Life imprisonment dissolves 
of marriage without action. 

(358) 



bonds 



Acts of 1909, C. 
249. 



R. S. 1907, C. 76, 
Sec. 3793. 

R. S. 1901, Title 
45, C. 4, Sec. 
3113. 

R. S. 1904. C. 54, 

Sec. 2672. 

Civil Code, 1909, 

C. 2, Art. 2, 

Sec. 92. 
R. S. 1908, C. 41, 

Sec. 2112. 
R. S. 1902, Title 

43, C. 254, Sec. 

4551- 

R. S. 1893, C. 75, 
Sec. I. 

R. S. 1911, Title 

3, C. I, Art. I, 

Sec. 2945. 
R. S. 1902, Title 

2, C. 2, Art. 2, 

Sec. 2647. 
R. S. 1909, C. 40, 

Sec. I. 
R. S. 1908, Art. 

37, Sec. 1067. 
R. S. 1897. Title 

16, C. 3, Sec. 

3174- 
R. S. 1909. C. 95, 

Sec. 6258. 
R. S. 1909, C. 66, 

Art. 2, Sec. 

2117. 
R. S. 1904, Sec. 

II 90. 
R. S. 1903, C. 62, 

Sec. I. 



No. 4] 



SPECIFIC DISABILITIES 



107 



Massachusetts Imprisonment for life or five years 

or longer is ground for divorce. Par- 
don does not restore conjugal rights. 

Michigan Imprisonment for life dissolves mar- 

riage or is ground for divorce. Pardon 
does not restore conjugal rights. 

Minnesota Conviction after marriage is ground 

for divorce. Pardon does not restore 
conjugal rights. 

Mississippi Sentence to penitentiary without par- 

don before being confined is ground 
for divorce. 

Missouri Conviction after marriage, or before 

marriage and ignorance of other party, 
is ground for divorce. 

Montana Conviction for felony is ground for 

divorce. 

Nebraska Imprisonment for three years or 

more is ground for divorce. Pardon 
does not restore conjugal rights. 

Nevada Conviction for felony or infamous 

crime is ground for divorce. 

New Hampshire Conviction for crime punishable in 
the state by imprisonment for one year 
or more ; actual imprisonment under 
these conditions is ground for divorce. 

New Jersey Imprisonment after abandonment to 

be regarded as continued desertion and 
ground for divorce. 

New York Imprisonment for life a ground for 

divorce. 

North Dakota Conviction for felony a ground for 

divorce. 

Ohio Petition for divorce must be filed 

during the imprisonment of the adverse 
party. 

Oklahoma Imprisonment subsequent to marriage 

a ground for divorce. 

Oregon Conviction for felony a ground for 

divorce. 

Pennsylvania Provided application be made for di- 

vorce by the husband or wife of party 
convicted, conviction for felony is 
ground for divorce. 

Rhode Island In case either party is for crime 

deemed to be, or treated as if, civilly 
dead, it is a ground for divorce. 

South Dakota Conviction for felony is a ground for 

divorce. 

Tennessee Conviction for felony and sentence 

to confinem.ent in the penitentiary is a 
ground for divorce. 

Texas Conviction after marriage is ground 

for divorce ; no suit to be sustained 
until 12 months after final judgment 
and provided the governor has not par- 

(339) 



R. S. 1902, C. 
152, Sec. 2. 

R. S. 1897, C. 
232, Sec. 8620. 

R. S. 1905, C. 71, 
Sec. 3574. 

R. S. 1906, C. 37, 
Sec. 1669. 

R. S. 1909, C. 22, 
Art. 3, Sec. 
2370. 

R. S. 1907, Scc. 

3643- 

R. S. 191 1, Crim- 
inal Code, P. I, 
C. 14, Sec. 
5328. 

R. S. 1912, Sec. 
5838. 

R. S. 1901, C. 
175, Sec. 5. 



R. S. 1 9 10, Page 
2041, Sec. 31. 

R. S. T909, C. 19. 

Art. 2, Sec. 6. 
R. S. 1905, Civil 

Code, C. 5, Sec. 

4049. 
R. S. 1910, Div. 

7. C. 3. Sec. 

1 1979- 
R. S. 1903. C. 66, 

Art. 28, Sec. 

4832. 
R. S. 1910, Title 

6, C. 8, Sec. 

507- 
R. S. 1903- Page 

1235, Sec. 7, 

Par. 2. 

R. S. 1909, C. 
247, Sec. I. 

R. S. 1910, P. 3. 

Title I. C. I, 

Art. 2, Sec. 67. 
R. S. i8q6. Title 

4, C. I, Art. 2, 

Sec. 4201. 
R. S. iqii. Title 

68. C. 4, Sec. 

4631. 



io8 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



doned the convict; or the wife been 
convicted sya. the testimony of the hus- 
band or the husband on that of the 
wife. 
Utah Conviction for felony is ground for 

divorce. 

Vermont Imprisonment for life or for three 

years or more and actual confinement 
at the time is ground for divorce. 

Virginia Conviction for felony is ground for 

divorce. Pardon does not restore con- 
jugal rights. 

Washington If complaint be filed during term of 

imprisonment, conviction for felony is 
ground for divorce. 

West Virginia Conviction for felony is ground for 

divorce. Pardon does not restore con- 
jugal rights. 

Wisconsin Imprisonment for three years or more 

is ground for divorce. Pardon granted 
after divorce does not restore conjugal 
rights. 

Imprisonment for life dissolves mar- 
riage without judgment of divorce. 
Pardon does not restore conjugal rights. 

Wyoming Conviction for felony is ground for 

divorce. Pardon does not restore con- 
jugal rights. 



R. S. 1907, Title 
35, C. 3, Sec. 
1208. 

R. S. 1906, Title 
17, C. 148, Sec. 



R. S. 1904, Title 
28, C. 10 1, Sec. 

2257- 

R. S. 1910. Title 
6. C. 12, Sec. 
982. 

R. S. 1906, C. 64, 
Sec. 2921. 

R. S. 1898, C. 
109, Sec. 2356. 



R. S. iJ 

2355- 



Sec. 



R. S. 1910, C. 
266, Sec. 3924. 



3. The assumption of innocence is destroyed by means of a criminal record.' 



Alabama 



Arizona 



Arkansas 



California 



Colorado 



Superintendent to keep records of R. S. 1907, C. 
convicts, including name, age, place of 191, Sec. 6517- 

navitity, county wherein convicted, 
nature of crime and period of impris- 
onment, together with height, com- 
plexion and color of hair and eyes, etc. 

The secretary of the board of con- R. S. 1901, Title 
trol to keep records of all convicts, in- 56, Sec. 3575- 

eluding name, nature of crime, county 
and court wherein sentenced, nativity, 
degree of education, with an accurate 
description of person and whether 
previously confined or not. 

Superintendent to keep records of all R. S. 1904, C. 
convicts, including names (aliases as 123, Sec. 5872. 

well), crime, age, color, height, com- 
plexion, color of hair and eyes, marks 
on person, nativity and number of pre- 
vious convictions. 

Warden to keep records of all con- R. S. 1909. Penal 
victs, including name, crime, period of Code, Title I, 

sentence, nativity, degree of education, Sec. 1578. 

an accurate description of person, and 
v\^hether previously confined or not. 

P>oard to keep records of all con\'icts, R. S. 1908, C. 
including age, term of imprisonment, loS, Sec. 4839* 

offense, place of conviction, and pur- 
suits and habits of life. 

(360) 



No. 4] 
Florida 

Georgia 
Illinois 



Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 
Louisiana 
Maine 



Maryland 
Massachusetts 

Michigan 



Mississippi 



SPECIFIC DISABILITIES 

Superintendent and physician to keep 
records of convacts, including name, 
height, age, place of nativity, color, 
color of hair and eyes, crime for which 
convicted and length of sentence. 

Prison commissioners to keep records 
of name, crime, sentence, age, sex, 
height, weight and apparent ph)-sical 
condition of each convict. 

Warden to keep records of all con- 
victs, including counties wherein con- 
victed, crime, nature and duration of 
sentence, former trade, employment or 
occupation, habits, color, age, place of 
nativity, degree of education and 
description of person. 

Board of control to keep records of 
all convicts. 

Warden to keep records as to name, 
age, nativity, nationality and such 
other facts ^" can be obtained as to 
parentage, education, occupation, and 
earlj- social influences ; also weight, sta- 
ture and health record. 

Prison clerk to keep records of con- 
victs, including name, crime, period of 
sentence, nativity, an accurate descrip- 
tion of person and record of former 
sentences. 

Clerk of the penitentiary to keep 
register of names of convicts, crime, 
height, age, sex, color of hair and eyes, 
and date of discharge. Records to be 
open to public inspection. 

Prisoners who have been convicted of 
a felony, if it be deemed advisable for 
the purpose of subsequent identifica- 
tion, may be measured and described 
in accordance with the Bertillon 
method and their photographs and 
finger-prints taken. 

Record of every convict to be kept, 
including description of person and 
criminal history and photographs. 

Convicts convicted of felony shall be 
measured and described with the Ber- 
tillon methods for the identification of 
criminals. 

Warden to cause record of all pris- 
oners to be kept, including a descrip- 
tion and measurement by the Bertillon 
system, or such other system as may be 
deemed desirable for the identification 
of criminals ; also criminal history and 
photograph to be kept. Records not to 
be available to the public. 

Clerk to keep register of all convicts, 
including name (aliases), sex, race, na- 
tionality, place of birth, age, color of 
hair, complexion, height, weight, dis- 

(361) 



109 

R. S. 1906, Art. 
6, Title 4, Sec. 
4137- 



R. S. 191 1, Sec. 
1219. 



R. S. 1909, C. 
108, Sec. 18. 



R. S. 1907, Title 
26, C. 2, Sec. 
5718 a 12. 

R. S. 1909, C. 97, 
Sec. 6840. 



R. S. 1909, C. 97, 
Sec. .^801. 



R. S. 1904, Sec. 

2854. 



Laws 191 1, C. 5. 



R. S. 1904, Art. 
27, Sec. 584. 

R. S. 1902, C. 
225, Sec. 18. 



R. S. 1897, Sec. 
2147. 



R. S. 1906, C. 
107, Sec. 3628. 



no 



THE CAGED 31 AN 



[Vol. Ill 



tinguishing marks, if any, crime, term 
of sentence and whether or not a dan- 
gerous criminal. 

Missouri Convicts to be examined in the pres- 

ence of as many overseers as possible 
in order that thej' may become ac- 
quainted M'ith person and countenance. 
Records to be kept of name, height, ap- 
parent or alleged age, place of nativity, 
trade, complexion, color of hair and 
eyes and length of foot, together with 
any natural or accidental marks which 
may serve to identify a convict. If a 
convict can write, his signature shall 
be written under the description of his 
person. 

Montana Warden to keep record of name, age, 

sex, occupation, place of birth, crime 
and date of incarceration and expira- 
tion of sentence of all convicts. 

Nebrasic^ Warden to keep records of all con- 

victs, including name, age, nativity, na- 
tionality, with such other facts as can 
be ascertained of parentage, education, 
occupation, and earlj' social influences. 
Physician to keep records of name, 
height, stature, family history, together 
with health record. 

Nevada Warden shall keep records of name, 

age, sex, occupation, place of birth, 
crime, date of incarceration and expira- 
tion of sentence. 

New Hampshire Prisoners may, if it be deemed ad- 
visable, be measured and described in 
accordance with the Bertillon method 
for the identification of criminals, and 
may have their photographs and finger- 
prints taken. 

New Jersey Prisoners to be examined by princi- 

pal keeper, clerk and as many deputy- 
keepers as can conveniently attend in 
order that they may become acquainted 
with countenance. Record to be kept 
of name, height, apparent or alleged 
age, place of nativity, trade, complex- 
ion, color of hair and eyes, length of 
feet, together with such natural and 
other marks and peculiarities of feature 
as will serve to identify him. If con- 
vict can write he shall sign his name 
under such description. 

New York Superintendent of state prisons to 

cause all prisoners to be measured by 
the Bertillon system for identification 
of criminals. 

North Dakot.\ Warden to keep records of all con- 

victs, including name, age, sex, color, 
height, nationality and each and every 
other fact, characteristic and condition, 
natural or artificial, that may in any 
way tend to aid in identification of 
prisoner. 

(362) 



R. S. 1909, C. 19, 
Art. 19, Sec. 
1631. 



R. S. 1907, Part 
3, Title I, Sec. 
9722. 

Laws of 1911, C. 
184. 



R. S. 1912, Sec, 
7565. 



Laws 1907, C. 24. 



R. S. 19 10, Page 
4912, Art. 7. 



Prison Laws, 

1909, Sec. 21. 



R. S. 1905. C. 17. 
Sec. 10354- 



No. 4] 



SPECIFIC DISABILITIES 



III 



Ohio 



Oregon 



PEXXS'i'LVAXIA 



Rhode Island 



Tennessee 



Utah 

Virginia 

Washington 

West Virginia 
Wisconsin 

Wyoming 



Arkansas 



Physician to keep record of convicts, R. S. 1910, Div. 
including nationality or race, weight, 3, C. 2, Sec. 
stature, former occupation and family 2194. 

history, together with health record. 

Superintendent to establish a rogues' R. S. 19 10, Title 
gallery, in which shall be placed the 2,Z^ C. 14, Sec. 
pictures of all persons confined in the 4522. 

penitentiary. 

Warden shall keep records of all con- R. S. 1907, Page 
victs, including name, height, apparent 3494, Sec. 43. 
or alleged age, place of nativity, trade, 
complexion, color of hair and eyes, 
length of feet, and accurate measure- 
ments, together with natural or acci- 
dental marks which may serve to iden- 
tify. If convict can write his signa- 
ture shall be written under description. 

Prisoners may in discretion of iDoard R. S. 1909, Title 
be measured and described in accordance 38, C. 360, Sec. 
with Bertillon system. Board to see 18. 

record of measurements, etc., is kept 
and to keep duplicate record in its own 
office. 

Warden to keep records of all convicts, R. S. 1903, Sec. 
including name, nativit}-, nationality, 7517- 

all facts that can be obtained about 
parentage and early social influences 
which may tend to indicate constitu- 
tional and acquired criminal defects 
and tendencies of prisoner. 

Board to have records of all convicts R. S. 1907, Title 
kept, including parentage and early 72, C. 10, Sec. 

social influences, and to base on these 2245. 

an estimate of character and probable 
plan of treatment. 

Clerk to keep a register describing R. S. 1904, Title 
all prisoners. 55- C. 202, Sec. 

4114. 

Names of prisoners and crimes to be R. S. 1910, Title 
recorded. State auditor to keep a 78, C. 2, Sees, 
public record of all convictions. 8542-4. 

Clerk to keep record describing all R. S. 1906, C. 
prisoners. 4657- 

Clerk shall keep record of all convicts R. S. 1898, C. 
received, discharged, pardoned or dead 201, Sec. 4902. 

and such other matters as may be nec- 
essary in statistics of this kind. 

State board of charities and reform R. S. 1910, C. 
to keep records of all prisoners, includ- 41, Sec. 520. 
ing name, date of sentence, age, sex, 
color, religion and nativity, nature of 
crime and ability to read or write. 



Use of dead body for scientific purposes: ^ 

The body of a convict who has suf- R, 
fered the death penalty may be buried 
in the penitentiary burial ground, or on 
application of any respectable surgeons. 



S. 1908, C. 35, 
Sec. 2668. 



^ This is not permitted in Wyoming. 

(363) 



I 12 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



CALIFORNIA 



Colorado 



Connecticut 



Illinois 



Indiana 



it may be delivered to them for dissec- 
tion, unless claimed bj- some relative 
or friend desiring to give it Christian 
burial. 

An J' sheriff or keeper of a county jail Political Code, 
or state prison must surrender the dead 1909, Title 7, 

bodies of such persons as are required C. 4, Sec. 3094. 

to be buried at public expense, to any 
physician or surgeon, to be used by him 
for the advancement of science. If such 
person during his last illness request 
to be buried, or if within 24 hours 
some person claiming to be of kindred 
require the body to be buried, such 
body shall be buried. 

The officers having control of any R. S. 1908, C. 
almshouse, prison, etc., may surrender 127, Sees. 6072- 

the dead bodies of such persons as must 75- 
be buried at public expense to any 
licensed phj'sician of the state to be by 
him used for the advancement of sci- 
ence. If the deceased during his last 
illness requested to be buried, or if 
within 24 hours after his or her death 
any relative or friend require body for 
burial, body shall be buried. After 
having been used for scientific purposes 
body must be buried. 

The body of any convict who has 
been executed shall be buried in the or- 
dinary manner at expense of state, un- 
less claimed by relative or friend, de- 
siring to give it Christian burial. 

The bodies of convicts who die in the 
state prison shall, if unclaimed for a 
period of 24 hours, be at the disposal 
of the professors of anatomy and sur- 
gery in the medical institution of Yale 
University, to be used for the purpose 
of advancing medical science in this 
state and shall be subject to their 
order. 

Superintendent of penitentiary in 
whose custody is the body of any de- 
ceased person required to be buried at 
public expense shall give permission to 
remove body to any physician or sur- 
geon or to any medical college or school 
upon offer to remove free of charge, 
after notice has been given to rela- 
tives who may wish to bury body, and 
pro\'ided further that any medical col- 
lege that shall receive the bodies of de- 
ceased persons for purposes of scien- 
tific study, shall furnish the same to 
students of medicine and surgery at a 
price not exceeding $5.00 for each and 
every deceased body so furnished. 

It shall be the duty of any officer in R. S. 1908, C. 55, 
charge of a prison, etc., having in Sec. 6131. 

charge the dead bodies of any person 

(364) 



R. S. 1908, C. 35, 
Sec. 2036. 



R. S. 1902, Title 
36, C. 243, Sec. 
4432. 



R. S. 1909, C. 91, 
Sec. I. 



No. 4j SPECIFIC DISABILITIES 



113 



not claimed by relatives or legal repre- 
sentatives, and which may be required 
to be buried at public expense, unless 
the person has died of a contagious 
disease, to deliver body to anatomical 
board, unless body shall be claimed 
within 24 hours after death. 

Iowa Superintendent of any penitentiary R. S. 1907, Title 

may, with consent of relatives or 24, C. 9, Sec. 

friends, if any are known and without 4946. 

such consent if not known, deliver to 
any medical college or school, or any 
physician in the state for purposes of 
scientific study, the remains of any de- 
ceased person in his charge, unless 
such deceased person during his last 
illness expressed a desire that his body 
be buried. If such a body so delivered 
over is subsequently claimed bj' any 
friend or relative, the same shall be at 
once delivered to such party. The per- 
son receiving the body shall decently 
bury the remains after they hav^e been 
used for scientific purposes, and failure 
to do so shall be a misdemeanor. 

Kansas It shall be lawful for the faculty of R. S. 1909, C. 75, 

any regularly-organized medical col- Sees. 4878-9-80. 

lege in the state authorized to confer 
the degree of doctor of medicine, to 
claim and receiv^e the dead body of any 
criminal which would otherwise be 
buried in the potter's field ; such body 
to be used within the state for the ad- 
vancement of medical science and in- 
struction of students. The president 
and secretary of the college must give 
bond that body is only required for 
scientific purposes within the State of 
Kansas. The remains after serving 
such purpose must receive decent burial. 

Kentucky It shall be lawful for the professor R. S. 1909, Sec. 

of any medical college or school which 2645. 

is incorporated under the laws of the 
state to secure from the superintendent 
or warden, any unclaimed bod}^, after 
relatives and friends have been noti- 
fied, and three days have elapsed with- 
out action on their part. The professor 
is to have body embalmed and preserve 
the same for 30 days without dissect- 
ing it. During the 30 days body shall 
be delivered to friends on request. 
After such body has been examined as 
herein provided it shall be buried at 
expense of college. 

Maine Officers of any prison having charge R. S. 1903, C. 17, 

over dead bodies required to be buried Sees. 3-6. 
at public expense, shall deliver same 
to board composed of professors of 
anatomy and surgery in medical schools 
of state, who shall remove such bodies 

(365) 



114 



THE CAGED MAN 



[Vol. Ill 



to be used within the state for the ad- 
vancement of medical education. If 
family or friends claim body it shall 
be decently buried when no longer 
needed for scientific purposes. 

Maryland The bodies of deceased convicts may 

be claimed by their friends or devoted 
to scientific examination at the medical 
schools or buried in the potter's field. 

Michigan Officer in charge of any prison hav- 

ing in charge the dead body of any 
convict, not claimed and which must 
be buried at public expense, shall de- 
liver such body within 36 hours after 
death to the demonstrator of anatomy 
of a college of medicine. After bodies 
have been used for scientific purposes 
they shall be decently buried. 

Missouri Officer in charge of any prison shall 

give over the bodies of any convicts 
which are unclaimed by relatives and 
would otherwise have to be buried at 
public expense, to the state board for 
the disposition of human bodies, which 
is composed of the professors of anat- 
omy of all incorporated schools. 

Nebraska Warden of state prisons, etc., to de- 

liver the bodies of convicts, with con- 
sent of relatives, if they are known 
and without if not known, to medical 
colleges for purposes of scientific study. 

New Hampshire It shall be the duty of the keeper of 
an}' state prison or jail, to notify phy- 
sicians or surgeons who have previously 
made request in writing, whenever the 
body of any person would have to be 
buried at public expense. The person 
recei\"ing such a body must give bond 
that it will only be used in the pursuit 
of science, and after the use allowed by 
law will be decently buried. If body 
is claimed by relatives or friends 
within 36 hours after death it shall be 
given them. 

New Jersey Officers of prison, etc., shall deliver 

to duly incorporated pathological as- 
sociation bodies of dead convicts which 
require to be buried at public expense, 
imless claimed by relatives. 

North Carolina Bodies of all persons imprisoned at 
hard labor for violation of criminal 
laws of state, shall be delivered to the 
professors of anatomy of the medical 
schools of the state, provided bodies 
are not claimed by relatives and that 
convict was serving a sentence for 
felony. 

North Dakota Superintendent shall give over to any 
duly licensed physician the bodies of 
convicts, after notice has been given to 
relatives, and 36 hours allowed for them 

(366) 



R. S. 1904, Art. 
27, Sec. 633. 



R. S. 1897, Sec. 
5897. 



R. S. 1909, C. 78, 
Art. 3, Sees. 
8324-30. 



R. S. 191 1, Sec. 
9899. 



R. S. 1901, C. 
136, Sees. 1-4. 



R. S. iqio, Page 
3325, Sec. 12. 



R. S. 1908, C. 89, 
Sec. 4288. 



R. S. 1905, C. 24, 
Sees. 2079-81. 



No,:4] 



SPECIFIC DISABILITIES 



115 



Ohio 



Orzgon 



Pennsylvania 



South Carolina 



South Dakota 



Tennessee 



to remove bodies in. All bodies so 
used are to be decently buried or cre- 
mated. 

Warden of penitentiary in whose R. S. 1910, Sees, 
charge are unclaimed bodies which 9984-6. 
must otherwise be buried at public ex- 
pense shall hold such bodies not less 
than 36 hours and notify a professor 
of a college which by its charter is 
empowered to teach anatomy. After 
bodies have been subjected to examina- 
tion they shall be decently buried. 

It shall be lawful for professors and R. S. 1910, C. 6, 
teachers in medical colleges and schools Sees. 4747-9. 
in this state, or for any medical and 
surgical association, or regular physi- 
cian or surgeon, to claim and receive 
the body of any person executed pur- 
suant to sentence of law, and of all 
persons dying in the penitentiary while 
under sentence of law for crime, to be 
used for the purpose of medical and 
surgical studj', provided said body shall 
not have been interred or claimed by 
relatives within 24 hours after death, 
and that person has not expressed a 
distinct wish for burial. Bodies must 
be decently buried after ha\-ing been 
used for scientific purposes. 

Officer of any prison, etc., in charge 
of dead body of a convict which must 
otherwise be buried at public expense, 
is requested to notify state board of 
anatomy and permit it to use body for 
scientific purposes. 

Officers of any prison, jail, etc., hav- 
ing control of a human body which is 
required to be buried at public ex- 
pense, and that of any person upon 
whom the sentence of death has been 
executed under the law, shall notify 
the board for distribution of human 
bodies for scientific purposes. No 
notice shall be given of bodies claimed 
by relatives. After bodies have been 
used for scientific purposes they shall 
be decently buried. 

Persons in charge of unclaimed dead Code of Crimi- 
body of a convict to give notice to de- nal Procedure, 
partment of medicine of the state uni- igio. Sec. 682. 

versity, within 24 hours after receipt 
of body, specifying in such notice the 
probable cause of death. Such bodies 
shall be embalmed and held at univer- 
sity for 60 days during which time any 
friend of deceased requesting body for 
burial shall receive it. Bodies must be 
decently buried after having been used 
for scientific purposes. 

The bodies of dead criminals are de- R. S. 1896, Part 
livered to physicians pursuant to the 4, C. 8, Art. 3, 
law. 5ec. 6775. 

(367) 



R. S. 1903, Page 
320, Sees. 1-7. 



Civil Code, 1912, 
C. 19, Art. 18, 
Sees. 929-34. 



ii6 
Texas 



Utah 



Vermont 



Virginia 



Washington 



THE CAGED MAN 

Officers in charge of prisons, jails, 
etc., to deliver to anatomical board of 
Texas dead human bodies required to 
be buried at public expense, unless 
claimed by relatives or friends or if 
deceased died of contagious disease, 
except tuberculosis or syphilis. Effort 
must be made to find relatives who 
must claim body within 24 hours. In 
case a body is claimed by relatives 
within 10 days after being delivered to 
an institution it shall be delivered to 
them for burial without cost. 

It shall be the duty of any person 
into whose charge may come the un- 
claimed dead body of a convict, which 
would otherwise have to be buried at 
public expense, to give notice to the 
dean of the university within 24 hours 
after the receipt of the body, specifj^- 
ing probable cause of death. All bodies 
received at the university shall be 
promptly embalmed, and shall be pre- 
served for not less than 60 daj's dur- 
ing which time any relative or friend 
of deceased making request for body 
for burial shall receive it. After the 
60 days bodies may be used for scien- 
tific purposes and must then be de- 
cently buried or cremated. 

Superintendents of public institu- 
tions shall deliver over to a practicing 
physician who has applied in writing, 
bodies which must otherwise be buried 
at public expense. No such body shall 
be so delivered if deceased during his 
last sickness make request for burial, 
nor if relative, within 48 hours, require 
body ta be buried. 

Officers of prisons, jails, etc., shall 
deliver to the board for distribution of 
dead human bodies, bodies of convicts 
who must otherwise be buried at public 
expense, also bodies of convicts who 
have suffered the death sentence, un- 
less such bodies are claimed by rela- 
tives for burial. After having been 
used for scientific purposes bodies 
must be decently buried. 

Officer in charge of state prison, jail, 
etc., must surrender the bodies of such 
persons as would have to be buried at 
public expense to any physician or sur- 
geon, to be used by him for the ad- 
vancement of science. If deceased, dur- 
ing his last sickness, requests to be 
buried, or if, within 48 hours after 
death relatives or friends request body 
for burial, body must be buried with- 
out dissection. 



[Vol. Ill 

R. S. 191 1, Title 
90, C. 3, Sees. 
5756-63. 



R. S. 1907, Title 
74, C. II, Sees. 
2320-4. 



R. S. 1906, Title 
31, Sec. 5374. 



R. S. 1904, Title 
24, Sees. 1776- 
81. 



R. S. 1910, C. 67, 
Sees. 8409-11. 



No. 4] 



SPECIFIC DISABILITIES 



117 



West Virginia Officers in charge of prisons, jails, R. S. 1906, C. 45, 

etc., having in their charge bodies of Sees. 1725-30. 

convicts v\'ho must otherwise be buried 

at public expense, shall surrender them, 

on requisition, to the anatomical board 

of West Virginia, unless friends or 

relatives claim body for burial, or make 

affidavit that they are unable to bear 

expense of funeral and desire body to 

be buried at public expense. 
WiscoxsiN Public officials having charge of body R. S. 1898, C. 58, 

of deceased prisoner, which must other- Sees. 1437-8. 

wise be buried at public expense, shall 

promptly notify relatives or friends of 

deceased. If body be not claimed 

within 48 hours after death, it shall be 

placed at disposal of demonstrator of 

anatomy for scientific purposes, unless 

in his last sickness convict requested to 

be buried. Bodies used for scientific 

purposes must afterwards be decently 

buried. 

(369) 



INDEX 



24 



24 



ALABAMA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 4 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 11 

Serving fixed sentences 13 

Awaiting capital punishment . . 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 19 
Corporal punishment permitted . . 21 

Ho'w may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side mstitution permitted .... 

Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side institution prohibited . . . 

Public works ... 29 

Public works prohibited . . . . , 29 

Hozu is he maintained ? 

Bunking 47 

Food 53 

Clothing 57 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 59 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 66 

Time for good conduct forfeited . . 66 

Grading of prisoners 78 

Wage for overtime permitted ... 86 

Prison libraries 90 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may parole him . . 92 
The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 

by a prison sentence ? 
Citizenship lost .... ... loi 

Citizenship regained 10 1 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 108 

ARIZONA. 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs . . 9 

Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Awaiting capital punishment . . . 15 

(37 



Ho'tv may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited . 17 

How may he be worked ? 

Public works 30 

Hours of labor 46 

How is he maintained ? 

Food . , 53 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 59 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 66 

Time for good conduct forfeited . 66 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 92 

The Governor may pardon him . . 97 
What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship not forfeited 105 

Marital rights lost ic6 

A criminal record 108 

ARKANSAS. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 4 
Why is he co7 fined ? 

Working off a fine and costs ... 11 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment . . . 15 
How may he be ptcnished ? 

Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited ... 17 

Greater or more severe punishment 
than prescribed by board pro- 
hibited .... 23 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side institution permitted. ... 24 

Public works. 29 

Stale farms; community consump- 
tion 37 

State factories; community con- 
sumption 38 

Hours of labor 45 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 47 

Food 53 

Clothing 57 

I) 



120 



INDEX 



[Vol. Ill 



How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection. ... • • 59 
Provision for religious teaching . . 64 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 66 
Time for good conduct forfeited. . 66 
Special favors for good conduct 

allowed 77 

Prison schools . , . 89 

Prison libraries 90 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may pardon him. . 98 
What specific disabilities are caused 

by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 10 1 

Citizenship regained 10 1 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 108 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses Ill 

CALIFORNIA. 

What is the stattis of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 3-4 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 6 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 15 

H01V may he be 'jjorked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 25 
State industries; state consumption. 28 

Public works 30 

State factories ; community con- 
sumption 38 

Branding of convict-made goods . 41 

Hours of labor 46 

Hoiu is he maintained ? 

Bunking 47 

Food 53 

Clothing 57 

//o7v is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 60 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 67 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 67 

Grading of prisoners 78 

Wage permitted , 80 

Who can set him free ^ 

The Parole Board 93 

The Governor may pardon him . 98 
What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost . 10 1 

Citizenship regained .... loi 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 108 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 112 

(372) 



COLORADO. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 

The property of the state 4 

Why is he cot fined ? 
Working o0" a fine and costs ... 9 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted .... 25 

Public works . . ...... 30 

Competition with free labor pro- 
hibited 39 

Branding of convict -made goods . 41 

Hours oi labor 45 

Hov is he maintained ? 

Bunking 47 

Ho%u is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 60 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 67 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 67 

Wage permitted So 

Prison libraries 90 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 93 

The Governor may pardon him . . 9S 

IVhat specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 10 1 

Citizenship regained loi 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record . . ..... loS 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 112 

CONNECTICUT. 

Why is he confined? 
Working off fines and costs . 5, 9, 12 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Awaiting capital punishment. ... 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Shackles and chains permitted . . 19 
Gag, iron mask, etc., prohibited . 21 
Corporal punishment permitted . . 21 

Ho'u) may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted. ... 25 

Public works 30 

Manufacture of certain articles pro- 
hibited . . 44 

Hours of labor 46 



No. 4] 



INDEX 



121 



Ho'oj is he maintained / 

Bunking 47 

Food 53 

H01U is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 60 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 67 
Time for good conduct forfeited . 67 
Prison libraries 90 

Who can set him frez ? 

The Parole Board 93 

The Legislature may pardon him . 100 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 10 1 

Power of procreation lost 105 

Marital rights lost 106 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 112 

DELAWARE. 

Why is he confined? 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 15 

How may he be punished ? 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 

Corporal punishment permitted. . 21 

Stocks prohibited 23 

Hovj may he be -worked ? 

Public works 30 

State factories ; community con- 
sumption 38 

Hours of labor 45 

How is he cared for ? 

Bunking 47 

Food 53 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 67 

Time for good conduct forfeited. . 67 

Wage for overtime permitted. . . 86 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may pardon him. . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost loi 

Citizenship regained loi 

Marital rights lost 106 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 
Why is he confined ? 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment , 

Ho7v may he be worked ? 
Hours of labor 



How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 47 

Food 53 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 
inspection 60 

What specific disabilities are caused 

by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 10 1 

FLORIDA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 4 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs , . 11 
Serving a fixed sentence .... 13 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 
Reduction of food prohibited , . . 21 
Punishment injurious to mind or 
body prohibited 23 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side mstitution permitted ... 24 

Public works 30 

State farms ; community consump- 
tion 37 

Hours of labor 45 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 47 

Food 53 

Clothing 57 

How is he cared for ? 

Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 60 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 68 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 68 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 10 1 

Citizenship regained 10 1 

A criminal record 109 

\ GEORGIA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
I The property of the state .... 4 
73) 



122 



INDEX 



[Vol. Ill 



Why is he confined ? 
Serving a fixed sentence .... 13 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 15 

How may he be pzmishea ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 
Corporal punishment permitted . . 21 
Corporal punishment prohibited . 21 

How may he be worked ^ 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 25 
Public works . ...... 30 

State farms; community consump- 
tion 37 

Competition with free labor pro- 
hibited 39 

Hours of labor 46 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 47 

Food 53 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 

spection 60 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 68 
Tmie for good conduct forfeited . 68 

Prison schools 89 

Industrial training 91 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 102 

Citizenship regained ..... 102 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record ....... 109 

IDAHO. 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 6 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited ... 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 
Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 

How may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted ... 25 
State industries ; state consumption. 28 
Public works ..... ... 30 

Manufacture of goods manufactured 
by free industries in the state 

prohibited 41 

Hours of labor 45 

(3: 



How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 48 

Food 53 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection .60 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 68 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 68 

Grading of prisoners 78 

Prison libraries 90 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 93 

The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost I02 

Citizenship regained 102 

Marital rights lost 106 

ILLINOIS. 

Why is he confi^ied ? 
Working off a fine and costs . . 8 
Serving an indeterminate sentence . 13 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Corporal punishment prohibited . . 21 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited . . . 

Public works 

State factories ; community con- 
sumption . 

Competition with free labor pro- 
hibited 

Use of machinery prohibited . . . 

How is he maintained ■' 

Bunking 

Food 

How is he cared for / 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 

Provision for religious teachings . . 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 

Grading of prisoners 

Wage permitted 



25 



39 
41 



48 
54 



Wage forfeited 

Prison schools 

Prison libraries 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 

The Governor may pardon him 



60 
64 
68 
68 
78 
81 
81 
89 
90 



93 
98 



4) 



No. 4] 



INDEX 



123 



What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence 'f 

Citizenship lost 102 

Citizenship regained ..... 102 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 109 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 112 

INDIANA. 

What is the status of the prisoner? 
The property of the state .... 4 

Why is he confined? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 7 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Awaiting capital punishment . . . 15 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Horu may he be ptmished ? 
Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 
Corporal punishment permitted . . 22 

How may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted. .25 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited . . 25 
State industries : state consumption. 28 

Public works. 30 

State factories : community con- 
sumption 38 

Use of machinery prohibited ... 41 
Branding of convict-made goods . 42 
Manufacture of certain articles pro- 
hibited 44 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 48 

Food ... . . 54 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection . ....... 61 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 69 

Time for good conduct forfeited. . 69 

Prison schools 89 

Industrial training 91 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 93 

The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 102 

Power of procreation lost . . . .105 

Marital rights lost. ...... 106 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 112 



IOWA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state ... 4 

Why is he corifined ? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 9 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited . 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side institution prohibited ... 24 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted ... 26 

Public works 30 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunkir.g 48 

Food 54 

Clothing 58 

Hozu is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 69 

Time for good conduct forfeited . 69 

Prison schools 89 

Industrial training 91 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board . 93 

The Governor may pardon him . 98 
The Governor and Senate may 
pardon him 100 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 102 

Citizenship regained 102 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 109 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 113 

KANSAS. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 4 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 9 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Prohibition of capital punishment. 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited ...... ... 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 



(375) 



124 



INDEX 



[Vol. Ill 



Shackles and chains permitted . . 2o 
Corporal punishment prohibited . . 21 
Punishment injurious to mind or 
body prohibited 23 

How may he be -worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side institution prohibited ... 24 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted ... 26 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 25 
State industries ; state consumption. 28 

Public works 31 

Work injurious to health prohibited. 44 
Hours ot labor 45 

Houu is he maintained ? 

Bunking 48 

Food 54 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 61 

Provision for religious teachings . . 64 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 69 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 69 

Wage permitted 81 

Wage forfeited 81 

Prison schools 89 

Industrial training 91 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 94 

The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence / 

Citizenship lost 102 

Citizenship regained 102 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 109 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 113 

KENTUCKY. 

What is the status of the prisoner? 
The property of the state 4 

Why is he confined ? 

Working off a fine and costs ... 10 

Serving an indeterminate sentence. 14 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be published ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited . 17 

Corporal punishment prohibited. . 22 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted. ... 26 

(376) 



Public works 31 

Public works prohibited 29 

Branding of convict-made goods . 42 
Work injurious to health prohibited. 44 
Association with f.^ee laborers dur- 
ing work hours prohibited ... 44 
Hours of labor 46 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 48 

54 



Food 



How is he cared for ? 

Provision for health and medical 

inspection 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 69 

Wage permitted 81 

Wage forfeited 81 

Prison schools 89 

Industrial training gi 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 94 

The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 102 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 109 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses .... 113 

LOUISIANA. 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs . . 10, 12 
Serving a fixed sentence .... 13 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 
Shackles and chains prohibited . . 19 
Corporal punishment permitted . . 22 

Ho%v may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side institution permitted ... 24 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 26 

Public works 31 

State farms ; community consump- 
tion 38 

Branding of convict-made goods . 42 
Hours of labor 45 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking . . 49 

Food 54 



No. 4] 



INDEX 



125 



How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 61 

Provision for religious teaching , . 64 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 69 

Grading of prisoners 78 

Wage permitted 82 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison senterce ? 

Citizenship lost 102 

Citizenship regained 102 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 109 

MAINE. 

Why IS he confined ? 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Prohibition of capital punishment . 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 
Corporal punishment prohibited. . 21 

Hotv may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted. ... 26 

Public works 31 

Branding of convict-made goods . 42 
Manufacture of certain articles pro- 
hibited 44 

Hours of labor 46 

Hoiii is he maintained ? 

Bunking 49 

Food 54 

Hozi' is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 70 

Wage permitted 82 

Prison schools 90 

Prison libraries 90 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor and Council may 
pardon him 100 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sejitence ? 

Citizenship lost 102 

Marital rights lost 106 

A criminal record 109 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 113 

(3 



MARYLAND. 

What is the statu% of the Prisoner ? 

The ward of the state 4 

Why is he confined ? 
Serving a fixed sentence . . . . 13 
Awaiting capital punishment . . . 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited . . .17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 
Corporal Punishment permitted . 22 

How may he be worked? 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted .... 26 

Public works 31 

Manufacture of certain articles pro- 
hibited . 44 

Hours of labor 45 

Hoiv is he maintained ? 

Bunking 49 

Food 54 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 70 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 70 
Special favors for good conduct per- 
mitted 77 

Wage permitted 82 

Who can set him Jree ? 
The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 102 

A criminal record . 109 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 114 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

Why is he confined ? 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 14 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 18 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 

Gag, iron mask, etc., prohibited . 21 

How may he be punished ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted . . 26 
State industries ; state consumption. 28 

77) 



126 



INDEX 



[Vol. Ill 



Public works 32 

Limitation of number of convicts in 
one industry 40 

Manufacture of certain articles pro- 
hibited 44 

How is he maintained / 

Bunking 49 

Food 54 

Clothing 58 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 70 

Time for good conduct forfeited . 70 

Grading of prisoners 79 

Wage permitted 82 

Prison schools 90 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board ...... 94 

The Governor and Council may 
pardon him 100 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 102 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record 109 

MICHIGAN. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state 4 

Why is he confined ? 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 14 
Prohibition of capital punishment . 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 19 
Corporal punishment permitted . , 22 
Corporal punishment prohibited . . 21 
Showering with cold water pro- 
hibited 23 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 26 

Public works . 32 

State farms ; community consump- 
tion 38 

State factories; community con- 
sumption 38 

Manufacture of goods manufactured 
by free industries in the state 
prohibited 41 

Hours of labor 45 



Plow is he maintained ? 

Bunking 49 

Food 54 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 64 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 70 

Time for good conduct forfeited . . 70 

Grading of prisoner permitted . . 79 

Grade forfeited 79 

Wage for overtime permitted ... 87 

Assistance to prisoner's family . . 88 

Prison schools 90 

Prison libraries 90 

Who ca7t set him free ? 
The Parole Board ....... 94 

The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship not forfeited 100 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record 109 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 1 14 

MINNESOTA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 

The property of the state 4 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 9- 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Prohibition of capital punishment . 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

How may he be worked '/ 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 

side institution permitted .... 26 
Leasing to individuals for work in. 
side institution prohibited ... 26 

Public works 32 

State factories ; community con- 
sumption 38 

Limitations of number of convicts 

in one industry 40 

Hours of labor 45 

Hoxu is he maintained Z 

Bunking 49 

Food 54 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection ... 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 70 



(378) 



No. 4] 



INDEX 



127 



Time for good conduct forfeited . 70 
Assistance to prisoner's family . . 88 
Industrial training 91 

Who can set hini free ? 

The Parole Board 94 

The Governor and Board of Pardons 
may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are causeti 
by a prison sentence? 

Citizenship lost 102 

Marital rights lost 107 

MISSISSIPPI. 

What is the stattti of the prisoner ? 

The property of the state 4 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 12 
Serving a fixed sentence .... 13 
Awaitmg capital punishment . . . 16 

H01V may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Corporal punishment permitted . . 22 

Ho7v may he be luorked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 26 

Public works. . . 32 

Public works prohibited 29 

State farms : community consump- 
tion 38 

Hours of labor 46 

How is he tnaintained ? 

Bunking 49 

Food 55 

Clothing 57 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 
Reduction of time tor good conduct. 71 

Grading of prisoner 79 

Wage permitted 82 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor and .Senate may par- 
don him ICO 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 103 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record 109 

MISSOURI. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 

The property of the state 4 

(37' 



Why is he confined ? 

Working oft' a hne and costs . . . lo 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 



hibited 



17 



Hozo may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side mstitution prohibited ... 26 
State industries; state consumption. 28 

Public works 33 

State factories ; community con- 
sumption 38 

Hours of labor 45 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 49 

Food 55 

Clothing 57 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection . . 61 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 71 

Wage permitted 83 

Wage for overtime permitted ... 87 
Assistance to prisoner's family . 88, 89 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may parole him . . 92 
The Governor may pardon him . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 103 

Citizenship regained 103 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record 1 10 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 114 

MONTANA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 4 

Why is he confined ? 
W^orking off a fine and costs . 
Serving a fixed sentence . . 
Awaiting capital punishment . 



6 

13 
16 



How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Reduction of food prohibited ... 21 
Corporal punishment prohibited . . 21 
Showering with cold water pro- 
hibited 23 



9) 



128 



INDEX 



[Vol. Ill 



Ho'ii) may he be zvorkid ? 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 26 

Public works 33 

State factories; community con- 
sumption 39 

Hours of labor 46 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 50 

Food 55 

Hoio is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 62 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 7 1 
Time for good conduct forfeited . 7 1 

IVko can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 94 

The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him , ... 99 

What specif c disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 103 

Citizenship regained 105 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record ....... I lo 

NEBRASKA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 

The property of the state 4 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 5 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 13 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 1 6 

H010 may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

How may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted .... 26 

Public works 33 

Hours of labor 46 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 50 

Food 55 

Hoxu is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection .62 

Reduction of tim.e for good conduct. 7 1 
Time for good conduct forfeited . , 71 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 95 

The Governor and Board of Pardons 
may pardon him 99 



What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence:' 

Citizenship lost 103 

Citizenship regained 103 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record i lo 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 114 

NEVADA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state 4 

Why is he confined ? 

Working off a fine and costs ... 7 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment . . . 16 

Ho7o may he be pU7iished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Reduction of food prohibited . . . 21 
Corporal punishment prohibited. . 21 

How may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted. ... 27 

Public works 33 

Hours of labor 46 

How is he maintained ? 

Clothing 57 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 7 1 
Special favor for good conduct for- 
feited 77 

Grading of prisoner 79 

Wage permitted 83 

Wage forfeited S3 

Who ca7t set him free ? 
The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him . . . . 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 103 

Citizenship regained 103 

Marital rights lost . 107 

A criminal record IIO 

NEW HAMPSHIRE. 

Why is he confined? 
Working off a fine and costs ... 12 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 14 
Awaiting capital punishment . . . 16 

How may he he punished ? 
Solitary confinement permitted . . 19 



(380) 



No. 4] 



INDEX 



129 



How may he be loorked ? 

Leasing to individuals (or work in- 
side institution permitted .... 

Labor which can be . carried on 
without expense to county and is 
consistent with safe-keeping of 
prisoners permitted 

Hours of labor 

IIozv is he maintained ? 

Bunking 

Food 

Clothing 

IIo7v is he cared for ? 

Provision for health and medical 
inspection 

Provision for religious teaching . . 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 

Special favor for good conduct . . 

Wage permitted 

Who can set him free '/ 

The Parole Board 

The Governor may pardon him . . 

What specific disabilities are caused 

bv a prison sentence / 

Citizenship not forfeited .... i 

Marital rights lost i 

A criminal record I 

Use of dead body for scientific pur 
poses I 

NEW MEXICO. 

Why is he confined f 
Working off a fine and costs . . . 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 
Awaiting capital punishment . . . 

Hoiv may he be punished ? 

Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 

Dungeons permitted 

Corporal punishment prohibited. . 
How may he be worked? 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited . . . 

Public works 

State factories : community con- 
sumption 

Hours of labor 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 

Food 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 

Provision for religious teaching . . 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 
Time for good conduct forfeited. . 



27 



Who can set him free? 

The Parole Board 95 

The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentejtce ? 

Citizenship lost 103 

Citizenship regained 103 



NEW JERSEY. 

Why is he confined? 

Working off a fine and costs . . . 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 
Awaiting capital punishment . . , 



Hoiv may he be punished? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 

Dungeons permitted 

Shackles and chains permitted 
Shackles and chains prohibited 
Corporal punishment prohibited 

Ho'w may he be worked? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited . . . 
State industries : state consumption. 
State farms : state consumption . . 

Public works 

Branding of convict-made goods. . 
Hours of labor 



12 

16 



17 

19 
20 
20 

22 



26 
28 
29 

33 
42 

45 



62 

65 

72 

72 
(381) 



How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 50 

Food 55 

Clothing 57 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 62 

Provision for religious training . . 65 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 72 

Time for good conduct forfeited. . 72 

Assistance to prisoner's family. . . 89 

Prison schools 90 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 95 

The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 103 

Citizenship regained 103 

Power of procreation lost 105 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record no 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 1 14 



no 



INDEX 



[Vol. Ill 



NEW YORK. 

Why is he confined ? 
Serving an indeterminate sentence , 
Awaiting capital punishment . 



How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited ... 17 

Dungeons permitted 19 

Corporal punishment prohibited 22 
Showering with cold water prohib- 
ited 23 

Crucifix, yoke and buck prohibited. 23 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work 
inside institution prohibited . . 

State industries ; state consumption. 

Public works 

Branding of convict-made goods . 

Manufacture of certain articles pro- 
hibited . ... 

Hours of labor 



How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 

Food 



How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 

Provision for religious teaching . . 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 

Grading of prisoners 

Wage permitted 

Wage forfeited 

Prison schools 



Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 95 

The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sejitetice ? 

Citizenship lost 103 

Power of procreation lost .... 106 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record no 

NORTH CAROLINA. 

What IS the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 4 

Why is he coi^fined? 

Working off a fine and costs ... 12 

Serving a fixed sentence ..... 13 

Awaiting capital punishment . . 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishment pro- 
hibited 17 

(382) 



How viay he be worked ? 

Leasing 10 indivuiuals tor work out- 
side institution permitted .... 25 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted .... 27 

Public works . . ... . . 35 

State farms; community consump- 
tion 38 

Hours of labor 46 

H010 is he maintained ? 

Bunking . . 50 

Food 55 

Clothing 57, 58 

H01.V is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection .... 62 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 73 

Time for good conduct forfeited. . 73 

Wage permitted ...... 84 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may pardon him. . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost .103 

Citizenship regained . . . 103 
Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 114 

NORTH DAKOTA. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state . . .4 

Why is he confined? 

Working off a fine and costs 8 

Serving an indeterminate sentence. 14 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 



How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 



17 



How may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 26 
State industries; state consumption. 29 

Public works permitted 35 

State farms ; community consump- 
tion 38 

State factories , community con- 
sumption 39 

Hours of labor 45 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking .... 50 

Food 55 

Clothing 58 



No. 4] 



INDEX 



131 



How is he cared f 07- ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection . 62 

Provision for religious teaching , . 65 

Reduction of time tor good conduct. 73 

Time for good conduct forfeited . . 73 

Wage permitted . . . 84 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 96 

The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him .... 99 
What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost . 104 

Citizenship regained 104 

Marital ris);hts lost 107 

A criminal record no 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses .... 1 14 



OHIO. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 

The property of the state 

Why is he confined? 
Working off a fine ard costs . . . 
Serving an indeterminaie sentence. 
Awaiting capital punishment , . . 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 

How may he be worked? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited . . . 
Stale industries : state consumption. 
State farms : state consumption 

Public works 

Limitation of number of convicts i" 

one industry 

Branding of convict-made good.< 

Hours of labor 

How is he i/iiiin/dined ? 
Bunking. . . .... 

Food . . . . 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection . 

Provision for religious teaching . . 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 
Time for good conduct forfeited. . 
Special favors for good conduct per- 
mitted 

Grading of prisoner. . ... 

Wage permitted 

Wage forfeited 

Industrial training 

Who can set him free? 

The Parole Board 

The Governor may pardon him. . 



17 



46 



62 

65 
74 

74 

77 
79! 
84 I 
84; 
91 i 

961 

98 

(38.: 



What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 
Citizenship lost . . . . 104 

Citizenship regained 104 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record Ill 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 115 

OKLAHOMA. 

Why is he coiifined ? 
Working off a tine and costs ... 8 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 19 
Shackles and chains permitted , . 20 

How may he be worked? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 26 

Public works 35 

Branding of convict-made goods . 43 
Hours of labor ... . . 46 

How is he vunniaiiied? 

Bunking ... 5^ 
Food ... .55 
Clothing 58 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 63 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may parole him . . 92 
The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are eaused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 104 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record .111 

OREGOX. 

What is the status of iJtc prisoner ? 
The property of .4 

Why is he coiijaiui ? 
Working off a fine and costs . . - 7, 8 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 



Hoiv may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Dungeons permitted 19 



132 



INDEX 



[\"OL. Ill 



Iloii) may he be ivorked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted .... 27 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 27 

Public works 35 

State farms; community consump- 
tion 38 

Branding of convict-made goods. . 43 
Hours of labor . , 45 

H(nu is he viaintained ? 

Bunking . . . 51 

Food . . 56 

Ho'iv is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 63 

Reduction of time for good conduct 
permitted ... .... 74 

Time for good conduct forfeited . . 74 

Wage permitted 85 

Wage forfeited 85 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may pardon him . . 9S 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost . 104 

Citizenship regained 104 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record . ill 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses .... 115 

PENNSYLVANIA. 

Why is he confined ? 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 15 
Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

Hozi) may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited .... 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 19 
Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 

How may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for works in- 
side institution prohibited ... 27 
State industries ; state consumption. 29 

Public works 35 

State farms; community consump- 
tion 38 

Limitation of number of convicts in 
one industry ... ... 40 

Use of machinery prohibited ... 41 
Branding of convict-made goods. . 43 
Hours of labor 45 

How is he maijitaincd ? 

Bunking 51 

Food 56 



How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 63 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 74 
Time for good conduct forfeited . 74 
Special favors for good conduct 

permitted ... 77 

Wage permitted 85 

Who can set hiju free ? 

The Parole Board 96 

The Governor and Board of Pardons 
may pardon him ...... 99 

What specific disabilities are cazised 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship not forfeited 105 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record 1 1 1 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 1 15 

RHODE ISLAND. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The ward of the state 3 

Why is he confined ? 

Working off a fine and costs ... 10 

Serving a fixed sentence . . ■ ^Z 

Prohibition of capita) punishment . 15 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Corporal punishment permitted . . 22 

How may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted ... 27 

Hours of labor 46 

Ho'lV is he 7naintained ? 
Bunking . .51 

Food 56 

Clothing 57, 58 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 63 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 75 
Time for good conduct forfeited . 75 
Wage permitted 85 

Who can set him free ? 
The Legislature may pardon him . 100 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost . . 104 

Citizenship regained ... 104 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record 1 1 1 



(384) 



No. 4] 



INDEX 



I 



SOUTH CAROLINA. 

Why is he confined? 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment . . . 16 

How may he be punished? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 17 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 19 

Blood hounds permitted 19 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 

Hotu may he be wo7-ked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side institution permitted. ... 25 
Public viforks 35 

How is he maintained? 

Bunking 51 

Food 65 



How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 63 

Provision for religious teaching . . 65 

Who can set him free ? 

' The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 104 

Citizenship regained 104 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses . 115 

SOUTH DAKOTA. 



Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs . . . 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 
Awaiting capital punishment , , . 

Plo'tu may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishment pro- 
hibited 

Dungeons permitted 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted'. . . , 

Public works 

State farms ; community consump- 
tion 

Work injurious to health prohibited. 

Hours of labor 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 

Food 

Clothing ... 



52 

58 
(38 



How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 63 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 75 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 75 
Special favor for good conduct per- 
mitted 77 

Wage permitted .... 85 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 9^ 

The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 99 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 104 

Citizenship regained 104 

Marital rights lost 107 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 115 

TENNESSEE. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 4 

Why is he confined? 
Working ofit a fine and costs ... 11 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

Hozv may he be punished ? 

Cruel and unusual punishment pro- 
hibited 17 

Punishment exceeding hard labor 
prohibited . . 18 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 19 

Reduction of food permitted ... 21 

Hoii) may he be worked ? 

Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side institution permitted ... 25 

Leasing to individuals for work out- 
side institution prohibited ... 24 

Leasing to individuals lor work in- 
side institution permitted .... 27 

Public works 36 

State farms ; community consump- 
tion . 38 

State factories; community con- 
sumption .... 39 

Competition with free labor prohib- 
ited 39 

Hours of labor 45 

How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 52 

Food 56 

Clothing 57, 58 

How is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 
spection 63 

5) 



134 



INDEX 



[Vol. Ill 



Provision for religious teaching . . 65 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 75 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 75 
Special favor for good conduct per- 
mitted 77 

Prison schools 90 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison setitence ? 

Citizenship lost 104 

Citizenshif) regained 104 

Marital rights lost 107 

A criminal record iii 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 115 

TEXAS. 

Why is he confined? 

Working off a fine and costs ... 6 
Serving a fixed sentence . . 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

IIoTv 7nay he be punished ? 

Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 18 

Corporal punishment permitted . . 22 

Plow may he be worked ? 

Public works 36 

State farms ; community consump- 
tion 38 

JJow is he maintained ? 

Bunking . . c2 

Food ..... 56 

Clothine . c7 



lloxv is he cared for ? 

Provision for health and medical 

inspection 

Provision for religious teaching , . 

Grading of prisoners 

Prison schools 

Prison libraries 



Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 97 

The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 104 

Citizenship regained 104 

Marital rights kst 107 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 116 



UTAH. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state 4 

Why is he confined? 

Working off a fine and costs ... 7 

Serving a fixed sentence 15 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

Hozu may he be punished ? 

Cruel and unu-ual punishments pro- 
hibited . 18 

Solitary confinement permitted, . . 19 

Corporal punishment permitted . . 23 

Corporal punishment prohibited. . 22 
Showering with cold water pro- 

hibited 23 

IIcw may he be worked? 

Leasing to individuals for work cut- 
side institution prohibited ... 24 

Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 27 

State industries : state con.sumption. 29 

Public works permitted 36 

State farms: community consump- 
tion. . . 38 

Competition with free labor pro- 
hibited . • • 39 

Manufacture of goods manufactured 
by free industries in the state pro- 
hibited 41 

Hours of labor . . .45 

How is he ?nai?itatntd .-' 
Bunking 52 



Food 



s6 



IJoto is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 63 

Provision for religious teaching . . 66 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 75 

Time for good conduct forfeited. . 75 

Grading of prisoners 80 

Wsge permitted . 86 

Prison schools . . 90 

Prison libraries . . 90 

Who can set him free ? 

The Governor and Board of Par- 
dons may pardon him 100 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost . 104 

Marital rights lost io8 

A criminal record iii 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 116 



(386) 



No. 4] 



INDEX 



135 



VERMONT. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The ward of the stale 4 

Why is he confined? 

Working off a hne and costs ... 8 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

Ho'w may he be zvorked ? 
Leasir.g to initividuals for work in- 
side institution permitted .... 27 

Public works 37 

Hours of labor 46 

Hozo is he maintained ? 

Bunking 52 

Food 56 

Hotu is he cared for ? 

Provision lor rtjigious teachui^ . . 66 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 76 

Time for good conduct forfeited . . 76 

Wage permitted 86 

W'age forfeited 86 

Prison schools 90 

Prison libraries 90 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may pardon him 

What specific disabilities are cattsed 

by a prison sentence ? 
Citizenship not iorfeued . . 

Marital rights iosr . ... 
Use of dead body for scientific pur 
poses 

VIRGINIA. 

Why is he confined ? 
Working oft a line ana costs ... 1 1 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pre- 

hibited .... 18 

Dungeons permitted ... 19 

Bloodhounds permitted 19 

Reduction of food permitted ... 21 

Gag, iron mask, etc., permitted . . 21 

H01V may he be zvorked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted .... 27 
State industries ; state consumption. 29 

Public works 3^ 

State farms; comniunily consump- 
tion . . • 38 

State factories; community con- 
sumption 39 

(3 



98 



105 
iO(i 

116 



How is he maintained ? 

Bunking 5^ 

Food 56 

Clothing . . 57 

How is he cared f 01 ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection 63 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 76 
Wage for overtime work permitted. 88 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 104 

Marital rights lost 108 

A criminal record . 1 1 1 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 116 

WASHINGTON. 

Hozv is he confined ? 

Working off a fine and costs ... 6 

Serving a fixed sentence ... . 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 18 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 

How may he be worked ? 

Leasing to indiviilua-ls for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 27 

Public works . 37 

State factories; community con- 
sumption 39 

Hours of labor 46 

How is he mainiaitied ? 

Bunking ... 52 

Food 56 

Clothing ... 57 

Horv is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical in- 

specuon 64 

Provision for religious teaching . . 66 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 76 
Time for good conduct forfeited . . 76 

Who can set him free? 
The Governor may pardon him . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 
Citizenship lost ........ 104 

Power of procreation lost ... 106 

Marital rights lost 108 

A criminal record 1 1 1 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 116 



s-) 



1^6 



INDEX 



WEST VIRGINIA. 

Why is he co7tfined? 

Working off a fine and costs . . . lo 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Awaiting capital punishment ... 16 

How may he be punished? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 18 

Shackles and chains permitted . . 20 

Hoio may he be worked? 
Leasmg to individuals for veork in- 
side institution permitted. ... 28 
State industries: state consumption. 29 
Hours of labor 45 

How is he fnaiiitained ? 

Bunking 52 

Food ... 57 

Hoio is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 
inspection 64 

Who can set him free ? 
The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 105 

Marital rights lost 108 

A criminal record Ill 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses ... 117 

WISCONSIN. 

What is the status of the prisoner ? 
The property of the state .... 4 

Why is he confined ? 

Working ofT a fine and costs ... 8 

Serving a fixed sentence 13 

Prohibition of capital punishment . 1 5 

Hoio may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishment pro- 
hibited 18 

Solitary confinement permitted . . 19 
Corporal punishment prohibited . . 22 

Hoxo may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution permitted .... 28 

Public works prohibited 30 

State farms ; community consump- 
tion 38 

State factories ; community con- 
sumption 39 

Branding of convict-made goods . 43 
Hours of labor 45 



Hotv is he maintained ? 

Bunking 53 

Food 57 

Clothing . . ... 58 

Hi/to is he cared for ? 
Provision for health and medical 

inspection ... 64 

Provision for religious teaching . . 66 

Reduction of time for good conduct. 76 

Time for good conduct forfeited . . 76 
Special favors for good conduct 

permitted . 78 

W;-ge permitted 86 

Prison schools . 90 

Prison libraries 91 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 97 

The Governor may pardon him . . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 105 

Citizenship regained 105 

Marital rights lost 108 

A criminal record m 

Use of dead body for scientific pur- 
poses 117 

WYOMING. 

Why is he confined ? 
Working off a fine and costs . . 9, lo 
Serving an indeterminate sentence. 15 
Awaiting capital punishment . . 16 

How may he be punished ? 
Cruel and unusual punishments pro- 
hibited 18 

Hoio may he be worked ? 
Leasing to individuals for work in- 
side institution prohibited ... 27 
State industries ; state consumption, 29 

Public works 37 

Provision for health and medical 

inspection 64 

Provision for religious teaching . . 66 
Reduction of time for good conduct. 76 
Time for good conduct forfeited . 76 

Wage permitted 86 

Wage forfeited 86 

Who can set him free ? 

The Parole Board 97 

The Governor may pardon him . 98 

What specific disabilities are caused 
by a prison sentence ? 

Citizenship lost 105 

Citizenship regained 105 

Marital rights lost 108 

A criminal record ill 



(388) 



PROCEEDINGS 

OF THE 

ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 

IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK 



Volume III 

1912-1913 



EDITED BY 

HENRY RAYMOND MUSSEY 



The Academy of Political Science 

Columbia University, New York 

1913 



Copyright by 
The Academy of Political Science 



CONTENTS 



I. YEARBOOK OF THE ACADEMY 

Constitution and By-Laws 3 

Officers of the Academy 7 

List of Members 8-48 

IL EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT 

Goodno-jj, Fratik y. Judicial Interpretation of Constitutional Pro- 
visions 49 

Thompson, J. David The Amendment of the Federal Constitution . . 65 

Ford, Henry yones The Reorganization of State Government ... 78 

Lewis, William Draper The Recall of Judicial Decisions 85 

Ashley, Clarence The Recall of Judicial Decisions 96 

Sinith, Munroe The Development of American Constitutional 

Law 100 

Discussion 118 — 120 — 121 — 123 

Henry Rogers Seager, Miles M. Dawson 
Stone, Harlan F. The Issues Involved in the Methods of Select- 
ing and Removing Judges 124 

Hand, Learned The Elective and Appointive Methods of Selec- 
tion of Judges 1 30 

Roe, Gilbert E, The Recall of Judges ... 141 

Dougherty, y. Hampden Substitutes for the Recall of Judges 147 

Discussion i57— 159 — 161 — 163 

Richard S. Childs, Everett P. Wheeler, Charles H. Hartshorne, Edward 
D. Page 

Cleveland, Frederick A. The Federal Budget 165 

Willoughby, W. F. Efficient Organization of the Personnel in Admin- 
istration 180 

Parkinson, Thomas I. Legislation Drafting 190 

Reinsch, Paul S. The Initiative and Referendum 203 

Addresses at the Anniversary Dinner 210 228 

Albert Bushtiell Hart, Edgar T. Brackett 

Statements on the Direct Primaries by : 229-239 

yob E. Hedges, Oscar S. Straus and William Sulzer 
Report of the Meeting of the Academy of Political Science 240 

III. THe'bRYCE MEETING 

Proceedings of the Meeting of the Board of Trustees in Conferring Honorary 

Membership upon the Right Flonorable James Bryce 243 

Lindsay, Samuel McCune Introductory Remarks 244 

Butler, Nicholas Murray Remarks 246 

Ambassador Bryce Reply . . 248 



iv CONTENTS 

PAGE 

lY. THE CAGED MAN 

A Summary of Existing Legislation in the United States on the 
Treatment ok Prisoners 

BY 

E. Siagg W hi till 

what is the status of the prisoner 

The property of the state — The ward of the state 255 

why is he confined 

To work off a fine and costs. To satisfy a sentence — Fixed or indeter- 
minate. Awaiting capital punishment. 257 

how may he be punished 

Cruel and unusual punishments — Punishment exceeding hard labor — Soli- 
tary confinement — Dungeons — Blood hounds — Shackles and chains — 
Reduction of food — The gag, iron mask, etc. — Corporal punishment. — 
Showering with cold water — Stocks — Crucifix, yoke, buck, etc. Punish- 
ment injurious to mind or body — Greater or more severe punishment 
than prescribed by board. . 269 

HOW CAN he be worked 

Leased to individuals for work outside the institution — Leased to individ- 
uals for work inside the institution — The state may work him — State indus- 
tries for state consumption — Farms for state consumption — Public works — 
State farms for community consumption — State factories for community 
consumption — Under specific limitations — Competition with free labor — 
Number of convicts in one industry — Use of machinery — Manufacture of 
goods manufactured by free industries — Branding of prison-made goods — 
Manufacture of certain articles — Work injurious to health or dangerous to 
person of convict — Association with free laborers during work hours — 
Labor which can be carried on without expense to the county and is con- 
sistent with safe-keeping of prisoners. Hours of labor 276 

HOW is he maintained 

Bunking — Food — Clothing 299 

how is he cared for 

Health provisions — Religious provisions — Educational provisions — Moral 
education — Reduction of time for good conduct — Special indulgences for 
good conduct — Reporting of good conduct to board — Merit marks — 
Grading of prisoners — Wage reward — General education — Prison schools — 
Prison libraries — Industrial education ....^ 311 

who can set him free 

Parole — Pardon — The Governor — The Governor and Board of Pardons — 
Governor and Council — Governor and Senate — Legislature ....... 344 

what specific disabilities are caused by a prison sentence 

Loss of citizenship — Change in marital relationship — Loss of power of 
procreation (vasectomy) — A criminal record — Use of dead body for scien- 
tific purposes 353 



JgLIHL/iniU d&UI. JUIN 1 yJ \\3lt 



H 
31 

V.3 



Academy of Political Science, 
New York 

Proceedings 



PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE 
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET 



UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY